3 ms·
> "When you’re reading this article, or talking to someone, do you claim that you’re saying a string, a number, a Text, or something else. No! Data is simply da
by cute_boi 6y ago
> "When you’re reading this article, or talking to someone, do you claim that you’re saying a string, a number, a Text, or something else. No! Data is simply data, and data is inherently dynamic"
I think I disagree with this one. Yes data are inherently dynamic but every data usually have types associated with it. For me type is like rule. Eg u8 is a 8 bit unsigned int which is 0-255 is just a rule.
In English we have grammar which is rule or another type so to speak. a-zA-z etc doesn't make meaning on its own but a combination of rules make it meaningful and beautiful.
Thank You.
- madsbuch 6y agoThe article is generally imprecise, and I completely agree with you. Stating that `... data is inherently dynamic` in this context is plain and deductively wrong. If we can not add type to data, we can't even interpret it as a bit-string because, hey, it's a type! (the type of a string of 1's and 0's) Types are mostly used to reason about a program internally. But sometimes we need to consider the real world. When doing do we need to interpret data. In the Haskell-sense this means assigning types to it. A language like Elm has exemplified how the internal / external data barrier can be implemented for strictly typed languages. Haskell just considers everything a string and lets it be up to the developer to parse it.