more comments

scp-reviews-2108.tex

@@ -442,7 +442,22 @@ set of types for \texttt{x} will be \texttt{String,\ Number}, but for
 on page 27, a redundant test will make inference succeed.
 
 \begin{answer}
-Beppe: Yes indeed, we can add a remark on that
+Beppe: je ne sais pas comment gerer cette remarque. Est-ce
+Typed-Racket fait mieux que nous. Si type les parametres avec
+Int|String je pense que on n'est pas sorti de l'auberge. Si on type
+avec (Int,Int)|(String,String) ca marche mais il faut typer la
+paire. La seule solution qui ne demande pas de réécrire la fonction
+est de inferer comme nous faison dans le nouveau papier.
+
+@Mickael, check what happens in Typed Racket.
+
+@STH. We are not sure we understand this point. It seems that if we
+do not want to rewrite the whole function (using a single argument
+that we will type as (Int,Int)|(String,String) is to either to have an
+inference for the non-annotated function able to infer the
+intersection type, or explicitly annotate the function with the
+intersection type. And this in whatever system on considers,
+e.g. Typed Racket, Flow, TypeScript ...
 \end{answer}