Re: ignorance: customizable immutables?

On Saturday, June 20, 2015 at 12:23:12 PM UTC+8, Andrew Phillips wrote:
>
> so a new type of A is constructed not AStar.
>
>
> In that case, I probably misunderstood the question. Are we assuming here 
> that there is some kind of generic scheme that returns new immutables, 
> simply based on the inferred type of the instance and the new values?
>

I assumed that `asCapitalA` meant he was using the functional programming 
style (and not virtual inheritance) where it statically types correctly 
because of the subsumption to List[A].

I assumed that also because 1) he employed an anonymous type (not a 
subclass because there is no nominal type nor override specified), and 2) 
the context of him starting this thread was in reaction to my recent 
messages in other threads about the extensibility pitfalls of virtual 
inheritance and preferring functional composition instead by employing 
heterogeneous union typing and injection of composition by inverting 
control.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "scala-language" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.