Matthew Lugg

@ethernetsellout > Without #5038 this is a different way of doing the same thing. Equally, `const x = T{ ... }` is a different way of doing `const x: T...

@linusg The example you give wouldn't work with this proposal even if it were permitted for return types. This isn't proposing anything that relies on semantic analysis: to infer the...

I think that could be pretty reasonable, but it's a separate proposal IMO. That adds a (tiny) bit more complexity to RLS since you don't have the type being iterated...

I think #9938 is what you really want. You're targeting the wrong bit of syntax: Zig is generally migrating towards having more type annotations, not less.

This behaviour is not a bug, and is documented in the language reference. In essence, comptime code evaluation "gives up" after a certain number of backwards control flow branches, since...

Oh, I also need to work on SPIR-V, while it doesn't currently have CI coverage we probably don't want to regress that one. I'll take a look myself later, but...

@sno2 Using RLS here is a bit tricky. There are two options: * The same integer value is returned regardless of the type. In this case, that integer must fit...

Since the KVs are sorted, a linearly-growing bound will never be sufficient for extreme cases. Perhaps grow proportional to n^2 or something?

This is not a bug, but it's worded reasonably enough for a proposal, so I will label it as such. FWIW, I personally want to go the other way, by...

The examples above trigger an assertion in handling `validate_array_init_[ref_]ty` due to missing handling for `var_args_param_type`. That should be simple to fix. That said: @andrewrk, is there any reason `var_args_param_type` exists...