From 97f738eaf0762baa9e9927ea7bbe7ab63a93d254 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: witchiest <62822174+gaymeowing@users.noreply.github.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2024 13:19:51 -0500
Subject: [PATCH] Add reasoning for not preferring type-pack union syntax

---
 docs/result-type-operator.md | 4 +---
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/docs/result-type-operator.md b/docs/result-type-operator.md
index 5ebc316..adda6bb 100644
--- a/docs/result-type-operator.md
+++ b/docs/result-type-operator.md
@@ -104,18 +104,16 @@ local success, result = pcall(mrow, "cat food", ":3")
 ## Alternatives
 
 Allow for type pack unions to be written by developers, with the syntax probably looking like this:
-
 ```luau
 local function mrow(meow: string, mrrp: string): (true, string) | (false, nil)
 	-- code here
 end
 ```
-
 With this example breaking backwards compadibility with some types developers may have written already, as today the following is allowed:
-
 ```luau
 -- inferred as: ((meow: string, mrrp: string) -> (true, string)) | false 
 type mrrp = (meow: string, mrrp: string) -> (true, string) | false
 ```
+Although it should be mentioned that result types are the only valid usecase for type pack unions, and just having a result type would remove a potential footgun of someone using type pack unions for something thats not a result type. 
 
 Do nothing, and leave it up to developers if they want to write overloaded functions, or make their own result type.