Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Revenge of the Types

lucumr.pocoo.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–137 of 137 posts

Re: Revenge of the Types

#131

Post by calinet6 »

jshen wrote: post #123
calinet6 wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Told you it was a cop-out argument. I'm just telling you what my experience was when encountering this topic, and then my conclusion after revisiting it many times over the course of a dozen years or so.

You also made major condescending assumptions. Why?

Because I'm an asshole?

What do you want me to say? I have no illusions about the integrity of my rhetoric—it has none. It was a statement made without much thought based on my experience. It does not require or request your approval.

Re: Revenge of the Types

#132

Post by dllthomas »

jshen wrote: post #126
NateDad wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't believe that. The speed of producing code is not relative to typing speed. LOC per day depends on the complexity of the lines. I can write 500 simple lines or 50 complex lines of code in a day. I'd agree that higher level languages deal with some of the complexity for you, like memory management. But I bet the business logic takes a similar amount of time in almost any language, assuming the developer has the…

The way to reduce lines of code is to create good abstractions. Some languages may be better at this than others, and I think this is more important than the type system of the language.

In some languages, the type system helps quite a bit in creating abstractions.

Re: Revenge of the Types

#133

Post by rcthompson »

chaoky wrote: post #122
rcthompson wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are good examples of languages with specifications and at least two implementations that fully implement the spec?

Common Lisp, for sure

Yes, the various Lisps were the first possible examples I came up with (I think Scheme probably qualifies as well).

Re: Revenge of the Types

#134

Post by jshen »

calinet6 wrote: post #131
jshen wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You also made major condescending assumptions. Why?

Because I'm an asshole? What do you want me to say? I have no illusions about the integrity of my rhetoric—it has none. It was a statement made without much thought based on my experience. It does not require or request your approval.

You are interacting with another human being. Not caring about the person on the other end of that is something you should question.

Re: Revenge of the Types

#135

Post by calinet6 »

jshen wrote: post #134
calinet6 wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because I'm an asshole? What do you want me to say? I have no illusions about the integrity of my rhetoric—it has none. It was a statement made without much thought based on my experience. It does not require or request your approval.

You are interacting with another human being. Not caring about the person on the other end of that is something you should question.

I do care, it's why I made the comment I did in earnest. The lack of a fully formed argument was simply because of my lack of time and typing on a phone. Point taken: I will try to be more kind even to strangers on the internet. You need to let this go.

Re: Revenge of the Types

#136

Post by jshen »

dllthomas wrote: post #132
jshen wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The way to reduce lines of code is to create good abstractions. Some languages may be better at this than others, and I think this is more important than the type system of the language.

In some languages, the type system helps quite a bit in creating abstractions.

I doubt it makes it easier to create abstractions compared to a lisp.

Re: Revenge of the Types

#137

Post by dllthomas »

jshen wrote: post #136
dllthomas wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In some languages, the type system helps quite a bit in creating abstractions.

I doubt it makes it easier to create abstractions compared to a lisp.

There are upsides and downsides to working in something with a sufficiently useful type system versus working in a lisp - even as pertains specifically to abstractions.

You can doubt, but I'm speaking from some experience with both. That doesn't necessarily mean I'm right, of course, but take it for what it's worth.

Post reply on HN