Syntactic sugar for Generics

[achkasov]

I propose using \ as a simple syntactic sugar for generics with a single type parameter.

The two following types are equivalent:

Bar<T>
Bar\T

This might make nested types simpler avoiding the long >>>> tail, and look like a directory tree. A made up example with two equivalent types below

Ref<Box<RawPtr<T>>>
Ref\Box\RawPtr\T

The generics with several type parameters can be used as usual:

Box<Result<E<String>, RawPtr<Box<T>>>>
Box\Result<E\String, RawPtr\Box\T>

Any token can be used for the nesting, not necessarily \, the / could be used as well, as long as it does not introduce confusion.

[alimpfard]

🤔 I don't really see why this would be necessary tbh, you rarely need to name things like this and your scheme only saves one character...