On 2018-03-30T16:17:35 -0400 Brian Goetz <brian.go...@oracle.com> wrote: > > OK, we have a terminology confusion over the term "exhaustiveness > checking."
Got it, I'm up to speed! > But, your point is taken; *not* having a default in a situation that > requires exhaustiveness acts as a type-check on that exhaustiveness, and > saying default will then cover up any sins. I get it. Yep, that's the bit I'd hate to lose (not that I actually have it right now :]). -- Mark Raynsford | http://www.io7m.com
