Jump to content

Topic on Extension talk:WikiLambda/Discovery needs

DVrandecic (WMF) (talkcontribs)

I still hope we can get away without having explicit subtypes, but one other example could be:

  • As a function user, show me a list of Functions which take exactly a list of strings
  • As a function user, show me a list of Functions which take exactly a list of anything
  • As a function user, show me a list of Functions which take exactly a pair of string and boolean
  • As a function user, show me a list of Functions which take exactly a pair of string and something else
  • ...

So basically generic types where the argument might be not given (i.e. anything). Those are not defined as subtypes (i.e. we don't say "string16 is a subtype of string") but rather these are structurally necessary subtypes (list of string is a subtype of list of anything) - which makes the hierarchy static and predictable.

Jdforrester (WMF) (talkcontribs)

Good idea; how's that?

DVrandecic (WMF) (talkcontribs)

Perfect, thank you!