Re: [RFC] [Discussion] Literal Scalar Types

On Mon, Jun 15, 2026, at 2:45 PM, Seifeddine Gmati wrote: > Hi Tim, > > I think I might agree here, and others have raised the same concern on > Discord. Dropping float literals for now simplifies the RFC, so I am > inclined to do that, though I would like to hear what others think > before removing them. We debated allowing float as a backing type for enums, and eventually decided against it for a similar reason: It's not stable or discrete enough to be useful, and no other language we looked at supported them. I'm still undecided on the RFC as a whole (I need to fully read it first), but would support limiting the literals to just int and string. --Larry Garfield