2 ms·
Sure, my mistake. I meant something looser. Only that the types can be analysed structurally (ie., pattern matched). In C++, etc. there's a "radical nominalis
by mjburgess 6y ago
Sure, my mistake. I meant something looser.
Only that the types can be analysed structurally (ie., pattern matched).
In C++, etc. there's a "radical nominalism" in which the type was very opaque, ie., encapsualated.
- gpderetta 6y agoIt is complicated. Templates do allow some form of structural typing and the new-in-C++17 structured bindings do allow for decomposing and inspecting types (although this being C++ it is kind of awkward). Structured bindings are expected to evolve into full pattern matching in the future.