I'm trying to encourage the use of "template" to describe class and trait definitions—distinct from the types those definitions imply. I think it had bad connotations in C++, but the word is perfect for describing what it represents: every gap must be filled in on instantiation.
The compiler currently calls templates "class types", for example when you are told you can only inherit from a class type. But a trait is also a "class type". I think the rule is clearer when types aren't even mentioned: simply put, a template can inherit from another template.
-
-
http://scala.zone has a whole section on templates, and a different section on types. So far, it hasn't been too much of a problem deciding which of the two sections each lesson belongs in.
Show this threadThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.