21:12
<rbuckton>
I've been talking with Jack Works about his enum proposal and how it relates to mine. One of the things that came up was a sketch I made for supporting ADT-style enumerations that was based on my struct proposal: https://gist.github.com/rbuckton/4a5108fab40ac90551bf82d9884711b5. I've been revisiting that, as I'd like to make sure whatever solution we end up for enums will be consistent with structs/shared structs so that we might be able to have a "shared enum" (whose value could be stored in a field on a "shared struct").
21:13
<shu>
hm, a bit future looking at first blush, but happy to discuss
23:24
<Jack Works>
I've been talking with Jack Works about his enum proposal and how it relates to mine. One of the things that came up was a sketch I made for supporting ADT-style enumerations that was based on my struct proposal: https://gist.github.com/rbuckton/4a5108fab40ac90551bf82d9884711b5. I've been revisiting that, as I'd like to make sure whatever solution we end up for enums will be consistent with structs/shared structs so that we might be able to have a "shared enum" (whose value could be stored in a field on a "shared struct").
So we're going to have 3 different styles of object. Normal object, Records and Structs. I think support all of them in ADT enum is important.