Skip to content
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.

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

Moving forwards on named function types #17

Open
madsmtm opened this issue Nov 8, 2023 · 0 comments
Open

Moving forwards on named function types #17

madsmtm opened this issue Nov 8, 2023 · 0 comments
Labels
question Further information is requested

Comments

@madsmtm
Copy link

madsmtm commented Nov 8, 2023

RFC 3476 was recently submitted, which contains many of the same desires as the draft RFC on named function types in this repo.

Would it be welcome if I opened a few PRs to that RFC text, to help move the initiative forwards? As an example of a change I'd make, I think it makes sense to talk about function item types instead of "function definitions" / "fndef", as the RFC text currently does.

@madsmtm madsmtm added the question Further information is requested label Nov 8, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
question Further information is requested
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant