Analyzing functions

[Tohoma]

Currently we cannot analyze this function properly.
x::int is (f) ->
spit f

y is (x) ->
x(5)

y(x)

The problem is that we cannot check if x is a function because it is currently as a type integer.

[trixr4kdz]

So... you're saying that we SHOULD have a Function type?

[rtoal]

He's right in saying that

x::int is (f) ->
    spit f

is completely mis-typed. x is a function, not an int. Also you have no way of knowing the type of f. So you need to type-annotate it, or introduce type variables. In the former case you would say:

x is (f::int) ->
    spit f      // you can infer x is int->int

and in the latter, you would do;

x is (f) ->
    spit f      // infer x has type a->a, where a is a type variable

[trixr4kdz]

Ooohh ok, right of course, like ocaml.

[Tohoma]

Ohhh. Wow I totally forgot about that.
On May 10, 2016, at 1:48 AM, Trixie Roque <notifications@github.commailto:notifications@github.com> wrote:

Ooohh ok, right of course, like ocaml.

—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com//issues/33#issuecomment-218095978