Open ebfull opened 8 years ago
One thing I have not tested is how far the compiler is willing to resolve this recursively, though I'm sure similar issues pop up anyway with highly recursive protocols.
I like this - IMO it's mostly an ergonomics thing, but it still adds value. :+1:
Yeah, I like this too. One thing that might be a concern is if error messages get polluted with Pop
types. I can't test it right now, but I'll try to take a look at it tonight.
I understand this a little better now - pop()
substitutes zero()
as well, right?
EDIT: This sounds like a really silly question in hindsight...
.pop()
will automatically bring the type upward from the "recursive" depth indicated byVar<N>
, obviating the need for.succ().succ().succ().zero()
or similar things.Closes #25