-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.3k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
pitch: rename the "Child" types #2902
Comments
Note that if they all use the same name, then generic code can be simpler in some cases: fn foo(a: var) @typeOf(a).Child { ... } How would you write this with your proposal? Also, If we had a different name for each type of array, wouldn't it be harder to remember the specific name for each one? |
|
@marler8997 |
Yes, using @typeinfo allows for both. |
This affects, e.g. Line 188 in 702398d
Note also the naming convention of types should be respected. |
You know, |
What's problem? |
I can understand the origin of the name choice
Child
, but I dislike it for a couple of reasons:.
is, and I think unique names would improve readability in-practice, even if only slightly.I therefore propose that the
Child
types get renamed to some set of new (and unique) names. I don't think it matters so much what the exact names are, but rather that they are unique, and that they have something to do with what the type represents. A few suggestions:Pointee
,Target
, orDereferenced
, etc.Unwrapped
,Inner
,Value
,NonNull
, etc.Element
,Item
, etc.Element
,Component
,Scalar
, etc.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: