151–160 of 663 posts
Wouldn't this be an easy task for SCA tool e.g. Pylint? It has atleast warning against variable redefinition: https://pylint.pycqa.org/en/latest/user_guide/messages/refac...
> I wish it was the default, and mutable was a keyword. I wish the IDE would simply provide a small clue, visible but graphically unobtrusive, that it was mutated . In fact, I end up wishing this about almost every language feature that passes my mind. For example, I don't need to choose whether I can or can't append to a list; just make it unappendable if you can prove I don't append. I don't care if it's a map, lis…
Yeah I wish variables were immutable by default and everything was an expression Oh well continues day job as a Clojure programmer that is actively threatened by an obnoxious python take over
As a Python programmer at day job, that is Clojure-curious and sadly only gets to use it for personal projects, and is currently threatened by an obnoxious TypeScript take over, I feel this.
That is why vibe coding, JavaScript and Python are so attractive.
> In C/C++, making almost every variable const at initialization is good practice. I wish it was the default, and mutable was a keyword. I know it's irrelevant to his point, and it's not true of C, and it doesn't have the meaning he wants, but the pedant in me is screaming and I'm surprised it hasn't been said in the comments: In C++ mutable is a keyword.
# Immutable by default
x = 2
items = [1,2,3]
with mutable(x, items):
x = 3
items.append(4)
# And now back to being immutable, these would error
x = 5
items.append(6)
When I started programming in Haskell, where all variables are immutable, I felt like I was in a straitjacket Then, suddenly, the enlightenment
I'm sure others have written about this, but these days I think good code is code which has a very small area of variability. E.g code which returns a value in a single place as a single type, has a very limited number of params (also of single type), and has no mutable variables. If you can break code into chunks of highly predictable logic like this it's so so much easier to reason about your code and prevent bugs.
Whenever I see methods with 5+ params and several return statements I can almost guarantee there will be subtle bugs.
If designing your hypothetical ideal language, what are some intuitive/cute keywords you would choose for mutables/immutables? `let` is so 2020. `const` is too long. `static` makes me fall asleep at the keyboard. `con` sounds bad. How about `law`? law pi = 3.142 (heh typing on Mac autocompleted this) law c = 29979245 law law = "Dredd" or `set` or `once` or `make`?
There was a proposal in Java a few years back to introduce "val". I think it never gained traction but it would have been nice to have this in Java val firstName = "Bob"; val lastName = "Tables"; var fullName = ""; fullName = firstName + " " + lastName;
Also related, it annoys me that Java has final but otherwise poor/leaky support for immutability. You can mark something final but most Java code (and a lot of the standard library) uses mutable objects so the final does basically nothing... C++ "const" desparately needs to spread to other languages.
Jonathan Blow had strong objection with const keyword. I forgot because i did not understand at that time. Does anyone with jai experience have a counter point to that.
After a 2 year Clojure stint I find it very hard to explain the clarity that comes with immutability for programmers used to trigger effects with a mutation. I think it may be one of those things you have to see in order to understand.