Things went overall smooth, beside the test that checks it doesn't affect the results whatsoever, which requires a bit of infrastructure.
It doesn't seem to affect the end users, unless the code has type annotations referring to SAM.SAM or SAM.SAMResult.
If this is a concern, we can add an entry to the release note to help end users adjust (suffixing said annotations with <_> should do it).
In the implementation, there is a fold which was using "" as initial state for ID field, since the particular field of the state is basically ignored in the folder, I've put Unchecked.defaultof instead in the initial state.
Things went overall smooth, beside the test that checks it doesn't affect the results whatsoever, which requires a bit of infrastructure.
It doesn't seem to affect the end users, unless the code has type annotations referring to
SAM.SAMorSAM.SAMResult.If this is a concern, we can add an entry to the release note to help end users adjust (suffixing said annotations with
<_>should do it).In the implementation, there is a fold which was using
""as initial state for ID field, since the particular field of the state is basically ignored in the folder, I've putUnchecked.defaultofinstead in the initial state.