At present, we have a defining construct
(typealias id type-decl)
the purpose of this was to give a convenience name for otherwise unnamed
types.
The keyword TYPEALIAS stands out as inconsistent. All other defining
forms begin with "def". I initially resisted DEFTYPE because the form
doesn't actually define a new type -- it only binds a name to an
existing type.
However, I am coming to the conclusion that DEFTYPE is visually
preferable, and the possible interpretation that
(deftype nm type)
would introduce a new, named type that was incompatible with the
existing one seems to have faded out of the idea space in the language.
Unless there are objections, I will rename TYPEALIAS to DEFTYPE.
shap
_______________________________________________
bitc-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev
