@TypeOf with multiple args

[LemonBoy]

Closes #439 (oh that's quite old)

Missing pieces (for another PR/day):

• Use it in more places
• Documentation

[mproved]

Shouldn't this take tuple as argument instead of varargs?

[LemonBoy]

It feels a bit awkward with tuples, @TypeOf(.{bar}) looks like you're asking for the tuple type.

[SpexGuy]

Maybe we need a separate macro for this case? Something like @PeerType(.{ @TypeOf(a), @TypeOf(b) }). Pretty fugly but it's more consistent with the lack of overloads elsewhere and separates PTR from var -> type resolution which would let you use it in situations where only the types are known.

[LemonBoy]

TypeOf is not overloaded this way, the single-argument case is nothing but the multi-argument one with N=1.

[SpexGuy]

That's true, but it doesn't change that I can't do resolution if I only know the types. Are there any other precedents for varargs builtins?

[alexnask]

@SpexGuy
@compileLog, @asyncCall , @newStackCall (although the last two have to be switched to use an argument pack tuple)

[SpexGuy]

Ok then this is probably fine. I'm just worried that proponents of varargs will point to this as a reason to add them back into the language. ("you couldn't even write the builtins without them" or some argument along those lines.)

[SpexGuy]

But that concern can be separate from this PR. This is hardly the place for this discussion. Sorry @LemonBoy, carry on.

[andrewrk]

landed in 378bf1c