4 ms·
I think that a way to back up your claims is to compare the type errors from your approach with type errors from vanilla bidirectional type inference, in the sa
by nextaccountic 7mo ago
I think that a way to back up your claims is to compare the type errors from your approach with type errors from vanilla bidirectional type inference, in the same language.
Also: won't this type less programs than bidirectional type inference?
- simvux 7mo agoI have ported this into my real-world compiler however in the same re-implementation I'm also adding RVSDG and incremental compilation so it's gonna be a bit until it can be tested in practice. > Also: won't this type less programs than bidirectional type inference? I haven't come up with a situation where that'd be the case. I do suspect the opposite could be true if extended with things like associated types. But for now that's overly speculative.