Hi, I think I actually found a use case for the `d...

# language-proposals

[louiscad]

Hi, I think I actually found a use case for the dynamic behavior during prototyping/development: allow unresolved symbols after TODO(…) calls.
I created an issue: https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/KT-27818

[themishkun]

That can be resolved using `Nothing`as the type of that symbols

[themishkun]

just make some definitions like fun todoFooFun() = TODO() and val todoBar = TODO() and everything would compile

[themishkun]

This style let you to do top-down programming, which is type safe at the same time

[elect]

that would be awesome

[louiscad]

@themishkun My proposal is about not needing manual declarations, and be able to use operators and lambdas on unresolved references. I think it would help for DSL design

[themishkun]

@louiscad I think your proposal leads to the problem that “false proposition implies any proposition”. There is no help from the compiler nor typechecker, because it cannot infer your types or something.

[themishkun]

So I cannot imagine any use in that other than “it do not turn red”

[louiscad]

@themishkun It could turn red. I just want it to not prevent compilation when the code is unreachable because of a TODO() call

[elect]

exactly