Here's what I think the situation is in this discussion: - Matt (me), Shap, and William are skeptical that subtyping can be implemented without introducing allocations. - Keean doesn't see how subtyping would make it any harder to avoid introducing allocations. - Pal has joined in, but I'm not sure what his take is. - Matt Rice keeps bringing up SML records, and I'm not sure why. (Sorry, Matt.) - Everyone else has been silent for a while.
Again this is what I think is the situation. It's how it seems to me. Please correct me if I'm wrong. But if I'm right, can we stop talking about subtyping for a while, and tie up the other loose ends? The ones that are on my mind are 1) deep vs. shallow arity variables vs. type constraints 2) application-driven specialization without using subtyping _______________________________________________ bitc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev
