|Typechecking union types firstname.lastname@example.org (Thomas Christensen) (2006-06-27)|
|Re: Typechecking union types email@example.com (Curtis W) (2006-07-05)|
|Re: Typechecking union types DrDiettrich@compuserve.de (Hans-Peter Diettrich) (2006-07-05)|
|Re: Typechecking union types firstname.lastname@example.org (2006-07-05)|
|Re: Typechecking union types email@example.com (Thomas Christensen) (2006-07-28)|
|From:||Hans-Peter Diettrich <DrDiettrich@compuserve.de>|
|Date:||5 Jul 2006 15:15:42 -0400|
|Posted-Date:||05 Jul 2006 15:15:42 EDT|
Thomas Christensen wrote:
> For my master thesis, I need to get up to speed
> on the current state of the art within the somewhat
> narrow field of typechecking union types.
> What I need is some background on the various problems/issues related
> specifically to union types.
IMO the most important question is:
Is a union kind of implicit type cast, or can it hold polymorphic
(variant) information, but only one kind at a time.
As Wirth possibly had in mind with the tag field in Pascal variant
records, or as actually implemented in (Windows) Variant types, a
compiler could at least add a hidden information about the last
written "branch" of a union. When such techniques are used, the
problems should go away.
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.