3 ms·
This works nice for something as simple as a swap. But more complicated use-cases have requirements. I want those explicitly stated rather than inferred by a co
by Faark 7y ago
This works nice for something as simple as a swap. But more complicated use-cases have requirements. I want those explicitly stated rather than inferred by a compiler. Abstracting the actually used features behind names like U: String, T: Map is can keep complexity hidden. Or would you prefer the compiler to auto-generate them for you from usage? (like U: must have ChatAt(int)->Char, Length->int; T: must have put(U), get(U), Length->Int) I certainly prefer names. And those have to be declared somewhere.