Nadrieril

Didn't we say `\\\` ? I would expect `\\//` to be recursive so we'd want to start with the simpler non-recursive one

@Gabriel439 So we'd standardize only `\\//`, which recursively merges union types, is that right ? Is there any sensible `\/` that would go with it ? Maybe it would take...

Ah right, what I mentioned looks more like a dual to record projection I guess. I feel like your operator can almost always be replaced by a `merge` and `//`...

@Gabriel439 Oh neat, I never realized you could go both ways between records and unions. That makes `(\/) : (a → r) → (b → r) → (a \\// b...

So far the `Foo/show` builtins have produced text such that parsing it as a shall expression would give back the original value. For example, `Integer/show +3` gives `+3` instead of...

So would `{=} with a = True : A` parse as `({=} with a = True) : A`? I don't find that or the converse intuitive, I'm happy with it...

> I don't think it's the job of grammar to rule out intuitive ambiguity. Ah, that's where we disagree ^^. Assuming the error message was good enough to say "hey...

We should indeed probably add tests. I remember noticing this lack of tests but not adding them myself because dhall-rust doesn't support alpha-normalizing non-beta-normalized expressions.

If we had a more natural function than `Integer/clamp`, like for example `Integer/unpack : Integer -> ` (and maybe also `Natural/unpack : Natural -> `), then the first simplification could...

@Gabriel439 I meant that would represent the number -2, so it would be a real bijection. Then there would be a usability problem because that's kind of a confusing behavior...