Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Apr 13, 2023. It is now read-only.

Support type constructors #108

Closed
6 tasks done
lucaswerkmeister opened this issue May 24, 2015 · 0 comments
Closed
6 tasks done

Support type constructors #108

lucaswerkmeister opened this issue May 24, 2015 · 0 comments
Assignees
Labels
Milestone

Comments

@lucaswerkmeister
Copy link
Contributor

  • type constructors, including constraints
  • anonymous generic functions, including constraints
  • type parameters with type parameters
  • callable parameters with type parameters
  • named argument functions with type parameters
  • parameterized expressions with type parameters

See also ceylon/ceylon.ast#86

@lucaswerkmeister lucaswerkmeister self-assigned this May 24, 2015
@lucaswerkmeister lucaswerkmeister added this to the 1.2.0 milestone May 24, 2015
lucaswerkmeister added a commit that referenced this issue Jun 3, 2015
lucaswerkmeister added a commit that referenced this issue Jun 3, 2015
For #108.

Apparently, higher *order* types and higher *rank* types are different
things, which we’re both going to support as part of #108, so I invented
the name “higher types” for the test file :)
lucaswerkmeister added a commit that referenced this issue Jun 4, 2015
This part of #108 actually already works, since parameters don’t have
their own node type: They’re AttributeDeclarations or
MethodDeclarations, and MethodDeclarations of course already support
type parameters.
lucaswerkmeister added a commit that referenced this issue Jun 9, 2015
lucaswerkmeister added a commit that referenced this issue Jun 10, 2015
lucaswerkmeister added a commit that referenced this issue Jun 11, 2015
lucaswerkmeister added a commit that referenced this issue Jun 12, 2015
Another part of #108 that already works without having to change
anything. Looks like ParameterizedException’s default walker order works
for us.
lucaswerkmeister added a commit that referenced this issue Jun 15, 2015
This makes the test added in the previous commit work (oops!), and also
generally makes sense now that we have anonymous generic functions
(#108).
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant