Replies: 1 comment
-
Yeah, not sure what route we should take here. I'll need to play around with the built-in Option and Result to understand this better. The second approach (adding an implicit conversion b/w them) sounds better to me thus far because union types don't behave exactly the same as the current implementations of Result and Maybe. E.g I don't think there will be a check like this https://github.com/vkhorikov/CSharpFunctionalExtensions/blob/master/CSharpFunctionalExtensions/Result/ResultTE.cs#L17 |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
0 replies
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
-
With the TypeUnions proposals Option type and Result type will be built-in
see a quick demo
@vkhorikov have you already think about how you wish to see the lib go?
we could add support for all the existing extensions methods to support that built-in type?
like making all Maybe extensions available for Option (.NET type)
and make all Result extensions available for Result (.NET type)
or we could simply translate an option to a maybe, and a result(.NET) to a result here
anyway it's just food for thoughts
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions