2 ms·
Actually isn't this the problem? ML type systems are not designed for the beam, which has datatypes that are difficult to express in ml
by throwawaymaths 3y ago
Actually isn't this the problem? ML type systems are not designed for the beam, which has datatypes that are difficult to express in ml
- giraffe_lady 3y agoYes I was trying to be careful not to say that the ML-type approach was better than the incoming typed elixir approach. Just that it has well-understood limitations and tradeoffs that people are already familiar with, which is an advantage in certain situations. But, and I'm certainly not a type systems expert, I think something like ocaml 5's algebraic effects can model anything in beam? I'm not a beam expert either though so maybe I'm wrong. It might be unusably hairy though. Anyway though again I have high confidence that elixir will come up with an excellent type system for elixir. But a project starting from a well-understood type system and building towards beam will get a different result and I think that's likely also valuable.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- weatherlight 3y agoI thought it wasn't that the data types were hard to express but the dynamic nature of messages across nodes...
- throwawaymaths 3y agoI don't think h-m is really that great at stuff like (elixir type spec) <<_::8*_, 13>>