6 ms·
This article is bizarre. I've read it twice expecting an actual solution to null checking basically everywhere and it doesn't actually present one. I'll stick
by nbevans 12y ago
This article is bizarre. I've read it twice expecting an actual solution to null checking basically everywhere and it doesn't actually present one.
I'll stick with discriminated unions in F#, thanks. Errors are values, correct. But it seems hardly any languages actually bother to grok the concept. If your language doesn't provide type safety for ensuring that you capture all resulting conditions then it has failed its job.
- woah 12y agoSomehow the vast majority of code is written in broken languages?
- prodigal_erik 12y agoSounds about right, since the vast majority of code is unreliable crap.
- nbevans 12y agoYes. Along with the vast majority of programmers being absolutely terrible at their job, to such an extent that they can't even choose an appropriate tool (language) to do their trade with. Just look at how OpenSSL is written in C++. And look how that turned out. OpenSSL indeed. Wide-fucking-openSSL would be an even better name. Open to OSS contributions it is not; because the codebase is in such a terrible state. What is the point in OSS if nobody can contribute because it would take a year just to understand the ridiculousness of the codebase, right down to trying to understand why they chose such an inappropriate language for creating a supposedly verifiably secure software system.