3 ms·

There is such a thing of languages that align with human intuition. C++ and Rust are not these languages so you have to really learn these languages in depth. L

There is such a thing of languages that align with human intuition. C++ and Rust are not these languages so you have to really learn these languages in depth. Languages like typescript or python or go align more with intuition and you don't really need to learn as much about the details or patterns as these just naturally flow from your intuition. This is a huge huge thing as it makes the language literally take about a week to develop proficiency and two weeks to develop mastery. A language like C++... you can't even develop mastery in a year. That is not to say these languages are better. Intuition is just one trade off.

fpoling 1y ago
Typescript is not a language that matches intuition. Typing complex code while avoiding the any hatch resembles fighting limitations of the borrow checker in Rust.
- ninetyninenine 1y ago
  I find it highly highly intuitive. But my background is haskell like languages. I feel with practice basic type checking is something that helps you rather then hinders you. It can be learned easily imo. People coming from js tend to have a hard time but that's understandable. The borrow checker is not easily learned imo. It's always me running into a wall.
  - fpoling 1y ago
    For me the problem with TypeScript or Flow when the latter was a thing was that the syntax/semantics of the sub language of types was extremely ad-hoc with so many idiosyncrasies. Maybe if I programmed it all the time I would learned it. But I had to change the relevant code only occasionally and typing helpers to access DOM required constant look at the spec and StackOverflow. With Rust the rules at least are simple. While following them can be a struggle the compiler errors at least are much more helpful and points to the problem with the design or the checker limitations.

3 ms·

There is such a thing of languages that align with human intuition. C++ and Rust are not these languages so you have to really learn these languages in depth. L

by ninetyninenine 1y ago

fpoling 1y ago
Typescript is not a language that matches intuition. Typing complex code while avoiding the any hatch resembles fighting limitations of the borrow checker in Rust.
- ninetyninenine 1y ago
  I find it highly highly intuitive. But my background is haskell like languages. I feel with practice basic type checking is something that helps you rather then hinders you. It can be learned easily imo. People coming from js tend to have a hard time but that's understandable. The borrow checker is not easily learned imo. It's always me running into a wall.
  - fpoling 1y ago
    For me the problem with TypeScript or Flow when the latter was a thing was that the syntax/semantics of the sub language of types was extremely ad-hoc with so many idiosyncrasies. Maybe if I programmed it all the time I would learned it. But I had to change the relevant code only occasionally and typing helpers to access DOM required constant look at the spec and StackOverflow. With Rust the rules at least are simple. While following them can be a struggle the compiler errors at least are much more helpful and points to the problem with the design or the checker limitations.