Generics

The goal of generics would be represent compile-time or at the least JIT optimized codepaths. In this way they're more similar to C++ templates. In a type system they allow simple generic classes for specializing for types.

The big pictue of this section is to write out a near complete generics section to ensure types aren't implemented in a way that makes this awkward. It should be near seamless to introduce these as the main proposal relies on them in a few language feature areas.

class A<T = uint8> {
  a:T;
  constructor(a:T) {
    this.a = a;
  }
}
const a = new A(5);
const b = new A<uint32>(1024);

In that example by default the field a is type uint8, but the programmer foresaw someone might need to change this sometimes. Rather than hardcode this, the library exposes a generic parameter.

Constraints

Often not just any type can be passed into the generic argument. Nearly every language has a constraint system to specify what interface(s) a type must implement.

class A<T extends int> {
}

Simple syntax, but often you want to apply multiple interface constraints. TypeScript uses &.

class A<T extends B & C> {
}

I think that's sufficient and covers common use cases.

Value Type Generic Parameters

A value can be passed into generics like a function argument. The only caveat is they must be const and will be treated like const variables that are compiled away.

class A<V:int32> {
  f():int32 {
    return 2**V;
  }
}
const a = new A<5>();
a.f();

In this examples 5 is passed into the class creating essentially a unique implementation. For all purposes the first pass of the JIT would see it something like this:

class A5 e {
  f():int32 {
    return 32;
  }
}
const a = new A5();
a.f();

Passing generic value type arguments

Since the goal is optimization it is impossible to pass a non-const to a generic value type. This is fine as long as the right expression is also completely const:

function f() {
  const v = 5;
  const a = new A<v>();
  const b = new A<v>();
}

If this value needs to be defined outside of our function we can make it generic:

function f<V:int32>() {
  const a = new A<V>();
  const b = new A<V>();
}
f<5>();

This preserves the requirement that the argument needs to be const.

Syntax to get the value type's type

To increase readability often you want to define the type once and refer to the parameter's type. Something like decltype, but a better keyword. Or is that good?

class A<V:int32> {
 f():type(V) {
 }
}

Using Value Type Classes as parameters

WIP, is this necessary? Is it possible? What does it allow? They are non-dynamic, just like int32, so they should be alright.

Decorator Generics

WIP Generic decorators should work as expected. Write a few examples.

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Uh oh!