[Baypiggies] Type checking - argument for it being bad practice?
shaleh at speakeasy.net
Sat Oct 9 06:56:15 CEST 2010
On Fri, 2010-10-08 at 09:59 -0700, Shannon -jj Behrens wrote:
> Most of my bugs come from not understanding the problem well
> enough--not from type errors. That being said, I'm still excited
> about Scala which has a very rich static type system (yeah, yeah, go
> ahead and make fun of me ;)
I like haskell for this too. However as others have commented here the
type system ends up being used for duck typing most of the time. It is
rare to say "this has to be an int" instead we just use it for math and
the compiler figures out I meant a Num instance.
Of course the coding ends up being similar to the suggestions elsewhere
in the thread to just be optimistic and catch the exceptions. The
difference is most of it is handled by the compilation phase instead of
More information about the Baypiggies