Representing Type Lattices Compactly

This seems similar to the way CUE type lattices work. <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;cuelang.org&#x2F;docs&#x2F;concept&#x2F;the-logic-of-cue&#x2F;#the-value-lattice" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;cuelang.org&#x2F;docs&#x2F;concept&#x2F;the-logic-of-cue&#x2F;#the-value...</a>

No parametric polymorphism aka generic types?

You mention integer ranges as a specific type you hope gets handled. But how does something like that work? It feels somewhere between the general type and the specialization type? Would this just be a higher level in the integer section of the specialization lattice? Or would you want it out of the lattice structure completely? Because it would kinda conflict with integer unions, when thinking about it lattice-y<p>(Admittedly I&#x27;m in the same boat, I don&#x27;t know the math but stumbled upon implementing my own type system recently)

Looks almost exactly like what JavaScriptCore calls SpeculatedType.

wow I guess great minds really do think alike, I did almost the same exact thing a few years ago, but eventually gave up as my type hierarchy grew too complex.<p>You could probably represent a lot more complex relations with similar strategies by adding one or two cleanup instructions to union&#x2F;intersection operations, but whenever I&#x27;ve tried to do it, my head gets dizzy from all the possibilities. And so far I&#x27;ve been unable to find software that can assist in generating such functions.

OT, I&#x27;m <i>so very</i> looking forward to some language supporting a pushout (path independent) lattice of theories (types, operators, laws). So abstraction has math-like locality and composability and robustness.

This is also how Erlang&#x27;s Dialyzer works.

Come on man just do duck typing. You are killing me with this stuff.<p>It all reads so technical and long and mathematically academic but it’s just a bit mask.<p>I absolutely hate writing python now because I have to reason about a “list of list of errors” type defined by a teenager and they get mad at me if I don’t then define a new “list of list of errors, or none” type when I manipulate it. You guys are now employed by VSCode to make those hints look beautiful. VSCode is your boss now and your job is to make VSCode happy<p>I predict that in five years we will retvrn to duck typing in the same way that we are now retvrning to server side rendering and running on bare metal. Looking forward to the viral “you don’t need compound types” post on here. “Amazing - you can write code which does normal business tasks without learning or ever thinking about homotopy type theory”<p>Yes I get it if we are writing embedded code or navigation systems or graphics or whatever, please help yourself from the types bucket. Go ahead and define a dictionary of lists where one list can contain strings but all the other lists either contain 8-bit integers or None. But the academic cachet of insanely complex composable type systems bleeds through into a web server that renders a little more than “hello world” and it ruins my life