3 ms·

I think minimizing compile time is a weird metric to prioritize. It's essentially asking "Would I rather guarantee my program is more correct or save a few seco

I think minimizing compile time is a weird metric to prioritize. It's essentially asking "Would I rather guarantee my program is more correct or save a few seconds each time I compile?" I would also point out that not forbidding bugs that would be caught by a type-checker will decrease efficiency. You just won't realize it when it happens. Lastly, the impact on compile time doesn't have to be so great to be problematic. Plenty of languages with more expressive type systems have reasonable compile times. Some do not, I agree, but I'm not asking Go to leap to the forefront of type theory... I just think they could've done better.

morelisp 4y ago
> Would I rather guarantee my program is more correct or save a few seconds each time I compile? Iterating faster is also a way to improve the odds your program is correct.
- DonaldPShimoda 4y ago
  There is no inherent link between "number of successful compilations" and "program correctness". There is an inherent link between "the program type-checks" and "program correctness", because a successful type-check specifically means that a certain subset of syntactically valid programs have been thrown out due to being potentially problematic.