On Thursday, January 28, 2016 at 12:23:34 PM UTC+1, Toivo Henningsson wrote: > > Yes, you're right! I guess that you would have to break the chain at some > point with Any or similar, which doesn't feel quite satisfying. But maybe > it's the best that you can do for now. > > In your code, when you access fields that are not typed as strictly as you > want, at least you can put in a type assertion on the value to allow the > compiler to specialise on the correct type. >
I did a similar thing before with the type assertions. I was trying to clean it up and make it more compiler friendly, and this was the problem I ran into.
