7 ms·
I certainly don't mean to knock nominal types. But I think structural types are more fundamental. A language would only need a single "newtype" or "nominal" key
by grumpyprole 8mo ago
I certainly don't mean to knock nominal types. But I think structural types are more fundamental. A language would only need a single "newtype" or "nominal" keyword to create nominal types from structural types.
- lock1 8mo agoWhy structural is more fundamental? C#'s anonymous type shares some flexibility of structural type system even though it still a nominal type. > A language would only need a single "newtype" or "nominal" keyword to create nominal types from structural types. I think you also can add `structural` keyword & apply structural type system in generally nominal type system as well if we're talking about adding feature.