Skip to content

Conversation

@smarter
Copy link
Member

@smarter smarter commented Oct 22, 2018

I haven't tried to do it, but to be be complete, we should also
update the definition of base types in the spec to include
intersection types and union types (I believe this is where we
would explain the rules regarding type members that were changed
in #5214).

@smarter smarter requested a review from odersky October 22, 2018 02:42
@odersky
Copy link
Contributor

odersky commented Oct 22, 2018

Great summary! Agreed that we also ned to spec basetypes, but maybe it's more productive to do this separately, buy updating the section on base types to deal with all new types in one go.

Copy link
Contributor

@odersky odersky left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Great summary! Agreed that baseTypes should also be speced but maybe it's better to do this in one central place, for all new types together.

Copy link
Contributor

@odersky odersky left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Great summary! I agree that basetypes need to be speced, but maybe it's better to do this in one place, for all new types together.

Copy link
Contributor

@odersky odersky left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Great summary! I agree that basetypes need to be speced, but maybe it's better to do this in one place, for all new types together.

@smarter smarter merged commit da32ca1 into scala:master Oct 22, 2018
@sjrd sjrd mentioned this pull request Oct 22, 2018
25 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants