3 ms·
Thanks but I'll take the ability to write arbitrarily complex type-checks over anything else. As a C++ dev who goes out of his way to express things of the type
by jcelerier 5y ago
Thanks but I'll take the ability to write arbitrarily complex type-checks over anything else. As a C++ dev who goes out of his way to express things of the type system this has only ever been a positive for me, the loss in compile-time is more than offset by the ability to eliminate whole classes of bugs in one go.
- bmc7505 5y agoIf you want arbitrarily complex type-checking, why not just check the property you want at runtime instead using an esoteric typelevel programming language? The whole point of having types in the first place is provable decidability, not universal computation -- that's what the value-level is designed to do.