Add features from next to master

gilligan commented 8 years ago

As described in #27 I rebased next fixing two failing tests. I also updated the README describing the new record syntax and the possibility to define instance methods.

gilligan commented 8 years ago

@paldepind care to have a look at this? :)

paldepind commented 8 years ago

Hello @gilligan. I am sorry for leaving you waiting. I just had my last exam today—so I have more time now.

Thank you a lot_ for bringing the changes in the next branch up to date and for pushing me to get these changes published.

This is my current plan:

Merge this PR
Fix the problem I mentioned here:

The biggest problem in my implementation is that when you create a value from an object the fields will be put both in numerical properties (0, 1, etc.) and in the field name properties (name, id, etc.). I think not keeping numerical properties for record-like-types is the solution.
Implement an idea for a better way to define instance methods.
Open a new issue to hear what people think

Does that sound fine to you?

paldepind commented 8 years ago

Is it possible to merge this against the next branch instead of the master branch?

gilligan commented 8 years ago

Sure, I will do a new PR tomorrow.

paldepind commented 8 years ago

@gilligan Thank you :smile:

paldepind / union-type

Add features from next to master #28