3 ms·
> does not correspond to what derived implicits do I did not claim it did. The first example disproved ionforce's claim that default values cannot be construct
by YorkshireSeason 9y ago
> does not correspond to what derived implicits do
I did not claim it did. The first example disproved ionforce's
claim that default values cannot be constructed dynamically.
> Define `a` as `y` to shadow the function parameter,
Whoops, yes that's correct. I didn't realise this was possible.
- lptk 9y ago> The first example disproved ionforce's claim that default values cannot be constructed dynamically. But I don't think that is what they meant. I think they meant something along the lines of what I said above: > an expression with an arbitrary number of subexpressions may be synthesized, the shape of which depends on the types involves
- YorkshireSeason 9y agoOK, maybe I misunderstood ionforce. I don't deny that type-driven synthesis is a core element of implicits.