I want a language with staging and a module system though - getting a bit sick of traits and their schenanigans
; __ ;
You’re unable to view this Tweet because this account owner limits who can view their Tweets. Learn more
Conversation
You’re unable to view this Tweet because this account owner limits who can view their Tweets. Learn more
You’re unable to view this Tweet because this account owner limits who can view their Tweets. Learn more
You’re unable to view this Tweet because this account owner limits who can view their Tweets. Learn more
You’re unable to view this Tweet because this account owner limits who can view their Tweets. Learn more
A bit unrelated, but the other day I noticed Rust also has higher rank *constraints* (e.g. for<'a> &'a T: Send) but only for lifetimes, not types. AFAIK, even Haskell doesn't have this, although you can emulate it
3
Of course traits and type classes are bad anyway so this is a bad feature
1
You’re unable to view this Tweet because this account owner limits who can view their Tweets. Learn more
You’re unable to view this Tweet because this account owner limits who can view their Tweets. Learn more
ooh, that sounds fun. I want some sort of trait system that uses modules (or actually, dependent records) - kinda like that modular implicits thing
I think there are 2 things type classes let you do which are kinda orthogonal
- Logic programming (might be more performant/user friendly with a dedicated system)
- Implicitly passing records around (which is where you get into problems with coherence)
1
1
I think I saw a paper for a better implicit system but it had some limitation which made it bad so idk
You’re unable to view this Tweet because this account owner limits who can view their Tweets. Learn more
Dunno if 's thing did that - need to get my head around some of the fancier stuff in that paper 🤔
1
Show replies