Re: [Chicken-hackers] deprecation of always?, never?, none?

[Thomas Chust]

Felix wrote:
> [...]
> "none?" is sort of weird, since there is no "none" type - every object
> is of some type.
> [...]

Hello,

that doesn't make none less of a type and it also doesn't make it less
useful — for example, in the context of type checking, you may want to
represent the fact that a function can never exit through its return
continuation by assigning the none return type to it.

Ciao,
Thomas


-- 
When C++ is your hammer, every problem looks like your thumb.