Update constrained-generics.md

rfcs/constrained-generics.md

@@ -6,33 +6,56 @@ Allows you to give a function generic a constrained type.
 
 ## Motivation
 
-Right now, when you create a generic function, the generic paramter is assumed to be everything. This creates problems, especially with tables
-```lua
-local function SomethingWithAGenericTable<T>(tab: T)
-  for _, v in t do --Cannot call non-function T (T is not a table)
+Some functions, such as the one below, allow you to feed it a table, and the table's keys are fed into the base object. With the current implementation of generics, this cannot be done and as such, the autocomplete information of the object is unavailable
 
-  end
+```lua
+type Enum<T> = {
+	GetEnumItems: (Enum) -> {[string]: EnumItem}
+} & T
+
+local function Enum<T>(description: T): Enum<T>
+	local enum = {}
+
+	-- merge keys into the enum
+	for _, enumItem in description do -- Cannot call non-function T
+		table.insert(enum, enumItem)
 	end
 ```
 
+Without the generics, this would type would become
+
+```lua
+{GetEnumItems(Enum) -> {[string]: number}, items: {[string[: number}}
+```
+
+In reality, we'd prefer it if items and GetEnumItems return `T`, instead of explicitly declared dictionaries.
+
 This constraining is mainly for concrete table types and functions, since types like `number`, `string`, and `boolean` are literal types.
 
 ## Design
 
 The way to implement this is to have new syntax under the generic's brackets: `<T: typedef>`. This would constrain the type from the generic def and give the typechecker better hints.
 ```lua
-local function SomethingWithAGenericTable<T: {[any]: any}>(tab: T)
-  for _, v in t do
-    print(v)
-  end
-end
+local function Enum<T: {[string]: any}>(description: T): Enum<T>
+	local enum = {}
 
-SomethingWithAGenericTable({meow = 5}) --OK
-SomethingWithAGenericTable(5) --not OK
+	-- merge keys into the enum
+	for _, enumItem in description do -- Typechecker now knows T is at least a string table, so this becomes somewhat valid
+		table.insert(enum, enumItem)
+	end
+```
+
+This will also help the typechecker from the outside looking into the function, for example:
+```lua
+Enum {None = 0, Some = 1, All = 2} --OK
+Enum {"None", "Some", "All"} -- Not OK (generic must be have string keys)
+Enum(0) -- Not ok (generic must be a table)
 ```
 
 ## Drawbacks
 
+More of the complexity budget spent.
+
 This adds unusual syntax, as well as adding to the complexity of the language.
 
 This also doesn't address how this should be approached around type packs.
@@ -41,7 +64,7 @@ This also doesn't address how this should be approached around type packs.
 
 Use something similar to Rust's `where` syntax:
 ```lua
-local function SomethingWithAGenericTable<T>(tab: T) where T: {[string]: any}
+local function Enum<T>(tab: T) where T: {[string]: any}
 ```
 
 Do nothing, and use the `assert(type(T) == T)` syntax, though this creates extra bytecode. It also casts the object as `never`, which removes the type errors, however no autocomplete information is generated.