4 ms·
The point about partial programs is a particularly strong one, especially when it comes to test-driven development. Being able to write a test for a method or f
by glv 8y ago
The point about partial programs is a particularly strong one, especially when it comes to test-driven development. Being able to write a test for a method or function before that method or function even exists may seem like a small thing, or even pointless ... but that flow and rhythm of "write the test, make it pass, refactor" is so strong and natural (once you've grown accustomed to it) that having to break that flow for brand new methods feels quite disruptive.
- Jweb_Guru 8y agoIt's pretty easy to add typed holes to a statically typed language in many cases, which will simply cause the program to panic if they end up being instantiated. I'm not really sure what issue the author takes with inserting panics / bottom until you're ready to actually deal with the problematic cases--the only way to make it more ergonomic would be to make it the default behavior, which pretty much means you're not getting any benefits out of type checking.
- joshlemer 8y agoI thought that was a pretty weak point. Rust has `unimplemented!()` and Scala has `???` which can be put anywhere to make the program compile.