On Thu, Jul 10, 2014 at 2:23 PM, Matt Oliveri <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm debating with Shap whether or not it's OK for type inference to > sometimes fail for unintelligible reasons. I say yes, Shap says no.
ah! thanks. makes more sense. (i think. :-) if it were possible to easily make it so that it never fails grossly, i assume that would be the best thing to aim for. however if that is fairly untenable, or worse is a lock-in that then turns out to fubar things down the road, then it seems like a bad errand to have to run. better to have the escape hatch of not locking things down so much. maybe. _______________________________________________ bitc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev
