Add detailed union types documentation #5305
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Great summary! Agreed that we also ned to spec basetypes, but maybe it's more productive to do this separately, buy updating the section on base types to deal with all new types in one go. |
odersky
approved these changes
Oct 22, 2018
odersky
approved these changes
Oct 22, 2018
odersky
approved these changes
Oct 22, 2018
25 tasks
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
I haven't tried to do it, but to be be complete, we should also
update the definition of base types in the spec to include
intersection types and union types (I believe this is where we
would explain the rules regarding type members that were changed
in #5214).