Is this the correct code to add syntactic sugar for types? Base.:(|)(X::Type, Y::Type) = Union{X,Y} Base.:(|)(X::TypeVar, Y::Type) = Union{X,Y} Base.:(|)(X::Type, Y::TypeVar) = Union{X,Y} Base.:(|)(X::TypeVar, Y::TypeVar) = Union{X,Y} at first glance everything works const Maybe{T} = T | Nothing …

Check this thread [image] Proposed alias for union types Internals & Design The | character is used in a few different languages as a concise way to specify type unions, like in TypeScript, Scala, PHP 8+, Python 3.10+, and (sort of) Haskell. I was curious to hear what peop…

Syntactic sugar for types

General Usage

jar1 September 21, 2024, 10:35pm 4

Check this thread

5 Likes

Topic		Replies	Views
Syntactic sugar for many arguments with same type annotation but separately dispatchable? General Usage type , syntax	2	535	July 11, 2019
Syntax sugar for Union{T, Void} Internals & Design proposal	5	1129	December 9, 2016
Proposed alias for union types Internals & Design question , proposal	145	3935	January 18, 2024
Short type declarations (syntax sugar)? Internals & Design proposal , suggestions , syntax	26	2605	July 9, 2019
Using of non exported functions of Base in package code General Usage	7	2118	November 10, 2021

Syntactic sugar for types

Related topics