| ▲ | grumpyprole 4 hours ago | |
I certainly don't mean to knock nominal types. But I think structural types are more fundamental. A language would only need a single "newtype" or "nominal" keyword to create nominal types from structural types. | ||
| ▲ | lock1 an hour ago | parent [-] | |
Why structural is more fundamental? C#'s anonymous type shares some flexibility of structural type system even though it still a nominal type.
I think you also can add `structural` keyword & apply structural type system in generally nominal type system as well if we're talking about adding feature. | ||