-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 71
Parametric types concept draft #916
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
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
concepts/parametric-types/about.md
Outdated
Only `primitive` types follow the abstract versus concrete pattern in its simple form. | ||
`Vector` is a collection, separable into elements with their own type. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I feel like this transition is a bit abrupt. A possible way to make more of a connection could be something like:
Collections, such as
Vector
orSet
(which are not primitive types), are separable into elements with their own type.
That said, I feel like the second part of this sentence ("...are separable into elements...) becomes redundant with the two sentences following the example, starting with:
A collection of what?
If the second part of the sentence were omitted, I could see the sentence being rephrased to something like:
One example of types which are not primitive are Collections, such as
Vector
orSet
.
It's fairly preliminary at this stage. I'm hoping to wrangle
elm/treasure-chest
into an exercise that can pair with it.