Last active
July 4, 2022 22:23
-
-
Save dsyme/bfed2eed788c7ba58ccc to your computer and use it in GitHub Desktop.
Naked type aliases can add and name constraints
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
// This F# language suggestion wants a way to name collections of constraints: | |
// http://fslang.uservoice.com/forums/245727-f-language/suggestions/8509687-add-constraints-as-a-language-construct | |
// | |
// This is a type alias X<T> = T, so X<int> = int etc. | |
type X<'T> = 'T | |
// This is a type alias X<T> = T which adds a constraint | |
type WithStruct<'T when 'T : struct> = 'T | |
// Use it like this: | |
let f1 (x: WithStruct<'T>) : 'T = x | |
// This shows a type alias can imply multiple named constraintsm which gives a way of naming collections of constraints: | |
type WithFG< ^T when ^T : (member F : int -> unit) | |
and ^T : (member G : int -> unit) > = ^T | |
// Use it like this: | |
let inline f2 (x: WithFG< ^T >) = | |
(^T : (member F : int -> unit) (x, 1)) | |
(^T : (member G : int -> unit) (x, 2)) | |
This would greatly help me.
Let's discuss on discussion thread please https://github.com/fsharp/fslang-design/blob/main/RFCs/FS-1124-interfaces-with-static-abstract-members.md
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Thanks Don for sharing the Gist but unfortunately the type alias trick does not solve the problem for purely static member constraints. In the following example for instance I want to express the same set of constraints for both ^T1 and ^T2 without having to repeat them twice.
Following your trick I could define a type alias encoding the two constraints (write and flush) but my constraints being entirely static I have no way to refer to the type alias it in a type annotation since there exist no variable of static type.
Do you have another trick up your sleeve for the above example?
Another benefit of named constraints is that the 'comparison' and 'equality' constraints could be defined in the F# core library instead of being hard-coded in the language.
An alternative suggestion would be to add support for generic type constraints of the form
^T :> GenericType<_>
. Together with the above trick that would allow me to write:which currently gives me an error: