> On Feb 28, 2017, at 11:04 AM, Joe Groff via swift-evolution
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>> On Feb 27, 2017, at 4:34 PM, Rex Fenley via swift-evolution
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> I often find myself running into situations where I'll receive "Ambiguous
>> use of..." for overloaded functions or operators. In every case these
>> situations would be easily solved if I could specify "Generic !=
>> CertainType" in the where clause of one of the overloads so I can
>> disambiguate the cases. Could this be added to language?
>
> Do you have a concrete example where you need this? It'd be good to know
> whether the types are ambiguous due to type checker bugs, or whether there's
> a principle by which they could be naturally ordered. Instead of overloading,
> can you do the type test via `if !(x is CertainType)` within a single
> implementation?
The best use case I can think of is if we had enum cases where the associated
value is a subtype of the enum:
enum Result<T, E> where E: Error, T != E {
case some(T) -> T
case error(E) -> E
}
>
> -Joe
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> swift-evolution mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
_______________________________________________
swift-evolution mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
