Summary
Proposing a T-lang design meeting to discuss the goals, scope, and experiment plan for RFC 3444 "Path inference" and the prototype implementing leading-dot syntax (e.g. .Variant, .{ … }, .(…)). The aim is to align on the mental model and any syntax concerns (e.g. behind -Zpath-inference).
Agenda
- What exactly are the goals and intended mental model of path inference?
- Should we explicitly deny generics in enums (
.Pending<f64, Foo>(0.0);)?
- Should we include alternative syntaxes in the experiment (e.g.
:Variant, :{ … } or _::Variant, _ { ... }), if so which ones?
Background reading
About this issue
This issue is a lang-team design meeting proposal for scheduling a discussion on the path inference experiment, its goals, scope, and gating strategy.
Summary
Proposing a T-lang design meeting to discuss the goals, scope, and experiment plan for RFC 3444 "Path inference" and the prototype implementing leading-dot syntax (e.g.
.Variant,.{ … },.(…)). The aim is to align on the mental model and any syntax concerns (e.g. behind-Zpath-inference).Agenda
.Pending<f64, Foo>(0.0);)?:Variant,:{ … }or_::Variant,_ { ... }), if so which ones?Background reading
About this issue
This issue is a lang-team design meeting proposal for scheduling a discussion on the path inference experiment, its goals, scope, and gating strategy.