4 ms·
Nah, in dependently typed functional programming languages you can prevent this at compile-time.
by coolsunglasses 13y ago
Nah, in dependently typed functional programming languages you can prevent this at compile-time.
- dllthomas 13y agoYes, "every language" was glib. In any language we could avoid it, actually, by hiding division behind something that gave a Maybe or Option or similar. My point, though, was that his "Imagine..." was actually representative of virtually all of the languages that virtually all of us work in virtually all of the time. It is therefore a poor example of a way in which HW is different.
- coolsunglasses 13y agoI went to dependent types specifically because I figured we meant static avoidance without resorting to checked arithmetic. (better performance)
- dllthomas 13y agoSure, that would be a good reason to go there. I didn't mean to cast aspersions at dependent types. I was just confused/amused at the typical case being cast as a hypothetical.