fantastic, thanks everyone, that solved my problem.
On Saturday, 18 January 2014 02:57:04 UTC, Eric Davies wrote: > > An example with the Complex type: > > julia> Complex.types > (T<:Real,T<:Real) > > julia> Complex.names > (:re,:im) > > These fields are defined for all DataTypes (including abstract types and > bits types), though for non-composite types they are an empty tuple. A > UnionType will have no field names, and the types field will be a tuple of > all types in the union. In parametric types, the elements of the types > array for fields whose types are parameterized are of type TypeVar. Check > out names(DataType) for other fields that give you all you'd need to > reconstruct any DataType with a macro or something. > > > On Friday, 17 January 2014 19:45:46 UTC-6, John Myles White wrote: >> >> I don’t know offhand how to do this, but I’d look at the code for xdump, >> which shows that the necessary introspection operations exist: >> >> Foo::DataType <: Any >> a::Int64::DataType <: Signed >> b::Float64::DataType <: FloatingPoint >> >> — John >> >> On Jan 17, 2014, at 10:16 AM, Simon Byrne <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > I want to define a new composite type with exactly the same fields as >> another type. Is there an easy way to do this? The original type is not >> parametric. >> > >> > Alternatively, is there a way I can figure out the type of a field of a >> composite type Foo without constructing an object of type Foo? >> > >> > -Simon >> >>
