Keean Schupke

Ah I see: ``` someCallback(x:Type,y:Type => x + y) ``` This is ambiguous... is it calling `someCallback` with 'x' as the first parameter and `y => x + y` as...

Personally I would rather have a single syntax for function definitions. If that is (with `Type` optional): ``` let f = (x:Type, y:Type) : Type => x + y ```...

Are we optimising too soon? I have implemented the basic function parser for the standard syntax, is that good enough for now? I think maybe we should try writing some...

The compiler can now take a string like this ``` id = (x) => x id(42) ``` compile it to: ``` id=function (x){return x;};id(42); ``` Next thing to sort is...

I think we should have an provisional section, so we can split the syntax into currently implemented, and under consideration.

Are we sure having keywords `let` and `var` is the right way to go? If we have keywords for these we might want to have a keyword for functions? I...

(Aside: Very few languages have a clean lexer and often you end up with lexer state depending on compiler state (string literals are a classic example). One of the advantages...

@shelby3 wrote: > I absolutely hate that. First time I saw that, I was totally confused. And I hate Rust's lifetime annotations littering the code with noise. So I am...

The number and function of the type parameters is not the same as the number and type of the arguments, some type parameters may only occur in the where clause....

I would rather say minimum two letters the second of which must be lower case for datatypes, and all caps for type variables. Also we can use universal quantification to...