On 7/9/17 1:36 AM, Walter Bright wrote:
If we wanted to be cute we could use `typeof()` to represent this type as there is no value you can give to typeof such that it returns the bottom type. It also avoids having to come up with some special symbol or name for it.That is indeed an interesting idea. Thanks!
We should use typeof(assert(0)) for Bottom. There is precedent - there is no name for typeof(null). -- Andrei
