Intransitivities in subtyping

A == B between types is implemented as A <: B && B <: A, and I don’t think that Direct <: SubStr makes it worse? We’d like subtyping to be transitive, or objects with A==B to be exchangeable when tested with <:, but failure of that is not a logical error.

But it would be a quite catastrophic logical error if we had a practical distinction between some A and B with A === B.

:+1: but maybe split off the parts of discussion that are still ongoing? I don’t feel like the ongoing discussion has gone bad yet.

That is only very slightly related to the 2 year old parts and should have been a new thread instead of necroing the old one.