Evaluate and prioritize requests from Cadence dev community

[j1010001]

Why (Objective)

We haven't had time to follow-up on requests from Cadence devs in the run-up to Crescendo.
Review language changes/feature requests form Cadence dev community, identify those that would benefit the community.

How will we measure success (Key Results) ?

• Schedule Working group session to discuss known issues with community devs
• Clarify impact and effort for discussed issues.
• Have list of requests / tasks ready for evaluation (estimation + prioritization).

Effort Estimate

TBD

DACI

Role	Assigned
Driver	Technical: @turbolent, EM: @j1010001
Approver	@dete
Consulted	@roham, @Kay-Zee
Informed	Flow engineering team

Topics for discussion:

Items for discussion

Preview Give feedback

1. Support referencing duplicate contracts (deployed to different accounts) in cadence context #1171
   Feature Feedback +2
2. Expose CCF to Cadence programs #3637
   Feature Feedback +2
   
3. Discuss effort remaining for impl. metering: Add a WebAssembly API #2853
4. Immutable contracts on C1.0 (Get community feedback)
5. Stretch-goal: Discuss scope / effort for: Direct resources access by ID (requested for long time by many community members)
6. send community survey to get feedback for next WG early Dec
7. Infer type arguments when type parameter is used as return type #3712
   Feature Feedback +2

[j1010001]

First list of requests/tasks discussed in Cadence working group: https://github.com/onflow/Flow-Working-Groups/blob/main/cadence_language_and_execution_working_group/meetings/2024-12-10.md

[j1010001]

List of topics to discuss in the next WG call (Ergonomics done, Functionality + Tooling left to do): https://www.notion.so/flowfoundation/Beyond-Cadence-1-0-Survey-13d1aee123248071a879e5e2324ed0a4