4 ms·
That hasn't been my experience so far, but I'd be interested to read in more concrete terms exactly what level of type-level invariant expression begins to crea
by yakshaving_jgt 7y ago
That hasn't been my experience so far, but I'd be interested to read in more concrete terms exactly what level of type-level invariant expression begins to create overly-rigid software.
FWIW, I'm not suggesting moving everything possible into types. I'm suggesting types are better than not having them, just like tests are better than not having them.
- jstimpfle 7y agoA software artifact that has a very specific type usually also needs to be very specific in terms of its required preconditions. Which puts a significant burden on the user of that artifact. And now that user probably requires its own additional preconditions to be able to conform. And so on. I don't know, maybe there is a good way of structuring the software to avoid this effect (I'm not extremely invested in type systems), but maybe it's just a lot of additional pain on top -- too much perceived pain for people who can barely make their software "seems to work".