On Wednesday, 3 February 2016 at 22:09:37 UTC, sigod wrote:
On Wednesday, 3 February 2016 at 19:21:06 UTC, Meta wrote:Ah, I see. I'd like to test something; can you please change `(a) => a * a` to`(int a) => a * a` and post the results?This works. http://dpaste.dzfl.pl/92c254ef6cf6
Seems reasonable: `(int a) => a * a` has return type `int` but just `(a) => a * a` does not yet know the type of `a`, and so can not tell the return type.
