You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Original bug ID: 4753 Reporter:@damiendoligez Assigned to:@garrigue Status: closed (set by @garrigue on 2010-04-27T07:08:56Z) Resolution: fixed Priority: normal Severity: minor Version: 3.11.0 Fixed in version: 3.12.0+dev Category: documentation Related to:#4803
Bug description
Everyone calls them "polymorphic variants", but the documentation calls them "variants".
To many people, that term evokes the constructors or values of regular concrete types.
In order to remove the ambiguity, I think we should rename them to something like
"open variants" or "dynamic variants".
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Disambiguated the meaning of "variant" by adding polymorphic wherever necessary (hopefully).
There are still a number of non-qualified or differently qualified cases, to avoid overly heavy
language, but they should be only left in paragraph clearly marked as concerning polymorphic
variants.
Original bug ID: 4753
Reporter: @damiendoligez
Assigned to: @garrigue
Status: closed (set by @garrigue on 2010-04-27T07:08:56Z)
Resolution: fixed
Priority: normal
Severity: minor
Version: 3.11.0
Fixed in version: 3.12.0+dev
Category: documentation
Related to: #4803
Bug description
Everyone calls them "polymorphic variants", but the documentation calls them "variants".
To many people, that term evokes the constructors or values of regular concrete types.
In order to remove the ambiguity, I think we should rename them to something like
"open variants" or "dynamic variants".
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: