The refusals generics obsoleted, swept. Every message that sent
somebody to a schedule now says what is actually true of the thing in
front of them.
An unknown lowercase type name used to be reported as unimplemented
generic code over a type variable. Generics are implemented, and
resolve_name consults env.tyvars and env.subst long before anything
reaches that arm -- so a lowercase name arriving there is a typo too
far from any type to guess at, or a type variable nobody introduced.
The sentence names the sigil that would introduce it.
A capitalised name given type arguments is the other half, and it is
still genuinely unbuilt: Types.Named is a bare string with no room for
parameters, and giving it some is a change to Types.t and therefore to
the layout calculator, both backends, Render and DWARF. Both sites
that reported it -- the type resolver and the value-position fork --
now say a generic *type* is not there yet and point at the generic
function that is.
Plus the prelude's side of it. pos?, neg? and zero? are three
questions about a number's sign, one body each, answering at every
numeric type -- the family the whole feature was asked for, and the
one thing the landed generics could not write until a literal was
allowed to stand at a bounded type variable.
Two collapses examined and declined, with the real reason written
where the old one was. abs stays per width because numeric? is the
only bound that admits a written 0 and it admits floats too, and the
integer body is the wrong abs for a float: it hands back a negative
zero. It waits on an integer? predicate, which is language surface.
min and max stay builtins because they are variadic and slot each
operand so it is evaluated once; a binary prelude generic would put
the double evaluation back at the call site. Their generic half was
never missing -- ordered? already admits them in any body that
declares it.
d5fed12d48