> If you cannot say certain things easily, then write a function to factor the common stuff in a layer that you can then build upon. This is the basics of progr

> If you cannot say certain things easily, then write a function to factor the common stuff in a layer that you can then build upon. This is the basics of programming, and from what I've seen this is already where it fails in most real-world codebases. This presupposes that the language even has facilities to enable appropriate abstractions! You can't argue that languages don't matter without reckoning with these real world matters. Yes, sure, I can just "abstract it away", yes, sure, "all languages are Turing complete so equivalent".... but no, that's not the whole story at all. > The same step up will be hard to repeat, since functions and structs are so expressive already, it's rare to find a problem that can't be elegantly solved using them. Expressive types are that next step up.