On 4 April 2015 at 12:19, Matt Oliveri <[email protected]> wrote: > > > You are _still_ missing the point. The need to make the right design > decisions is exactly what I'm talking about. I'm only pointing out > that part of that decision is what to allow in non-type, type-level > expressions. Unless you're claiming that allowing arbitrary type-level > computations would still not break unification (for example). But I > don't think you're saying that, 'cause it seems pretty clear that it > would, and I don't know much of anything about fancy type inference. > ______________________________________________ >
Arbitrary type level logic programs do not break unification, along with any non-Type kinds. Keean.
_______________________________________________ bitc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev
