4 ms·
That's an amazingly comprehensive answer. Thanks! So basically, when interacting with the outside world at scale, it's very hard to make any sort of guarantees
by m0meni 8y ago
That's an amazingly comprehensive answer. Thanks!
So basically, when interacting with the outside world at scale, it's very hard to make any sort of guarantees about kind of data you're working with. And since you have to validate the shape of your data already, you're doing the job of the type system yourself, which makes it less useful to have one. Did I get that right?
Aren't these issues only at the boundaries where you're receiving data from the outside world? Wouldn't it still be helpful to have a type system/static analysis at the local level?
- jerf 8y ago"And since you have to validate the shape of your data already, you're doing the job of the type system yourself, which makes it less useful to have one." I'd say it's more like you don't get the imaginary benefit of being able to skip that checking. And yes, a type system can absolutely help you with this, especially in terms of enforcing that you do this conversion (since the incoming byte[] stream is not going to be any of the types you actually want, even at the brute "int" or "char" level, let alone user-defined types). But there is certainly a sense in which this doesn't especially help you with dealing with remote nodes.