Re: Inaccurate description of UNION/CASE/etc type selection

On Sun, Aug 16, 2020 at 5:58 PM David G. Johnston <
david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

> 5. If the first non-unknown type is a preferred type it is chosen,
> otherwise it is made a candidate, and then,
> 6. each subsequent type is compared to the current candidate, with a new
> candidate being chosen only when there exists a non-mutal implicit cast to
> the new type.
> 6a. If at any point a preferred type is made a candidate then it will be
> chosen.
>

More concisely:

Make the first input type a candidate type. Each subsequent input type is
compared to the current candidate, with a new candidate being chosen only
when there exists a non-mutal implicit cast to the new type. If at any
point a preferred type is made a candidate then it will be chosen.

In my original the whole if/otherwise in 5 is pointless given the presence
of 6a.

David J.