Remove TypeOf*Type for types whose type-of-type can just be Type
#2302
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
jonmeow
approved these changes
Oct 18, 2022
There was a problem hiding this comment.
FWIW, I'm mixed on this idea (including the enum as mentioned in the PR) because it seems like it restricts the ability to perform reflection (i.e., performing different kinds of lookup on a choice, class, generic class, interface, etc). However, I'm taking this as a leads decision that reflection shouldn't be implemented in that way.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
We don't seem to have any need for
TypeOf*Typetypes, and having them introduces the temptation to use them during type-checking, which would lead to types having different behavior when their type-of-type isTypeversus when it's a more precise type. Remove these types for now.If we later decide that we want each type literal to have a unique type, as we do for value literals, we can introduce a single value kind for that rather than one for each kind of type.
No changes to
TypeOfMemberName,TypeOfParameterizedEntityName, andTypeOfMixinPseudoType, which are placeholders, not real types.