Use `type` as method instead of `string` about batteries

[1bardesign]

At the moment it's mostly indecisiveness on how to integrate it with class - I'm not sure if something should be exposed per-class for allowing reflection on types. Reflection in general is something I'm not super hot on but in the absence of proper types in lua it's more or less what we're "stuck with".

I don't mind the idea of class:type() just returning class.__type.
I'm not sure how standard it is or what the rules are around __ prefix table members. Likely doesn't matter though as we're more or less "stuck with" luajit in love land.

On the performance front, having it as a method basically involves an extra function call over just a property access, which isn't great but ultimately unlikely to matter as you're rarely doing this in an ultra-performance-sensitive environment, and having the __type member would allow an escape hatch.
The tradeoff is more complicated in a JIT context too, haha - if the method was inlined it could end up faster than a property access in some situations.

I'll think about it. I can see merit to keeping familiarity with love users, but I think probably something needs to be added to class to facilitate it being standard.

[flamendless]

Okay I understand.

It was just a hardship earlier tracking why calling pos.type() errors haha.

[1bardesign]

fixed in the recent class overhaul; :type() works for all classes (same syntax as love userdata so you don't need to typecheck even more ahead of time)