Skip to content

updated docs after #16021 was closed #16118

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Sep 29, 2022
Merged

updated docs after #16021 was closed #16118

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
2023f04
updated docs after #16021 was closed
nmcb Sep 28, 2022
a746a7f
Update match-types.md
nmcb Sep 28, 2022
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
6 changes: 6 additions & 0 deletions docs/_docs/reference/new-types/match-types.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -83,6 +83,12 @@ following conditions are met:
and these types are `=:=` to their corresponding type patterns in the match
type

So you know, while the case body will be expected to have the type on the right-hand
side of the corresponding match type case, that doesn't imply the match type argument
is constrained. Using the example, the last case body must conform to X, but that
doesn't constrain X to be AnyVal, and therefore a LeafElem[X] inside the body wouldn't
reduce; it would remain stuck, and as such just an abstract type.

## Representation of Match Types

The internal representation of a match type
Expand Down