See: https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/issues/210 https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/issues/1090 https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/pull/10269
On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 11:22 AM, Patrick <[email protected]> wrote: > Arguments for the ability to declare return types: > > 1. Type safety: Given the increase in speed one can achieve by > declaring input types to a function, return types would allow one to have > safer code. > 2. Fast function composition: I could be wrong here, but without > stronger function typing, one can't expect to pass functions as arguments > to other functions performantly. > > I don't know why optional return type declaration would be a bad thing. > btw, I'm a fan of the verbose/consistent syntax: > > myfcn(args::inTypes)::outTypes > > with all type parameters all being passed before the first parenthesis, as > usual. When passing myfcn to another function, perhaps one could do > > myfcn2(myfcn::Function{outTypes}) > > which might result in nested type parameters in the case that myfcn2 takes > a type parameter. I know this has been discussed in the past, but I'd > like to get a sense for where other users currently stand on this matter. > > > > > > >
