You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Since #6790 we have a way to opt-in for runtime argument checks of functions by using inline ascribed types (e.g. x:X). However there are limitations of inline ascribed types - for example they cannot specify return type of a function. There is a proposal to extend the inline syntax, however the classical syntax ->-> isn't going away - we need a way to type a function variable.
As such it makes sense to expand the runtime type checks to classical function type syntax. That will require changes thru out our libraries to adjust existing signature to their real value - at worst case opt-out of the check by add | Any to the argument signature.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Follow up of #6682:
Since #6790 we have a way to opt-in for runtime argument checks of functions by using inline ascribed types (e.g.
x:X
). However there are limitations of inline ascribed types - for example they cannot specify return type of a function. There is a proposal to extend the inline syntax, however the classical syntax->
->
isn't going away - we need a way to type a function variable.As such it makes sense to expand the runtime type checks to classical function type syntax. That will require changes thru out our libraries to adjust existing signature to their real value - at worst case opt-out of the check by add
| Any
to the argument signature.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: