4 ms·
I looked at SO much Java sources because the method signatures weren't complete enough. I would never have been able to integrate netty into our game servers t
by jeremiep 10y ago
I looked at SO much Java sources because the method signatures weren't complete enough.
I would never have been able to integrate netty into our game servers that optimally with only the docs as reference for one. Yet its documentation is really, really good. I still wanted to know its internals in order to hit the fast paths.
Whether you're using static or dynamic types, the very same holds true to build robust software: understand what you're doing.
Managing complexity and reducing state will always be the biggest factors to quality, regardless or type systems.
- mercurial 10y agoWell, considering the number of dependencies a typical web project has, I can tell that I'm far from understanding the internals of every library used in our codebase. I mean, of course you'll want to do that in some cases where performance is really important, but generally speaking type signatures and docs should be enough.
- LeanderK 10y agoi din't say that i don't look at source code, but not intuitively. I look at it when the method is very confusing, or i have to optimise one path, it is undocumented and important etc. What i wanted to say is that types give you a pretty good first intuition to what the method does and how (including exceptions). They help me navigate my way through the code, especially with DSL like the excellent jooq (http://www.jooq.org http://www.jooq.org)