| ... | ... | @@ -76,6 +76,6 @@ I believe this would solve the same problems as the above proposal, but would be |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There is a good case to be made for permitting the inclusion of function signatures in the export list of a module. People often write them there anyway in comments, but the comments are not checked against the implementation, so changes can go unnoticed. There is also a good software engineering principle that says you should specify your interfaces as fully as possible.
|
|
|
|
There is a good case to be made for permitting the inclusion of function signatures in the export list of a module. People often write them there anyway in comments, but the comments are not checked against the implementation, so changes can go unnoticed. There is also a good software engineering principle that says you should specify your interfaces as fully as possible. signatures in export lists should be considered equivalant to signatures specified in the module itself at the top level for all purposes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
