14 ms·
I've dabbled with rust, but did quite a bit of stuff in haskell. A lot of unit testing is verifying failure modes. What happens if they pass in null? What happ
by jfoutz 11y ago
I've dabbled with rust, but did quite a bit of stuff in haskell.
A lot of unit testing is verifying failure modes. What happens if they pass in null? What happens if they ask for a value i don't know about? stuff like that. Haskell (and rust) give you a lot more control over what a function is willing to accept at compile time.
You could spend your time writing a test to ensure null is handled gracefully. With rust, you have a bit more power, and you can simply ensure the function can't be called with null. It's more general than just null checking, but that's the flavor of what happens.
- neverminder 11y agoThat's my general feeling as well. Coming from Scala transition into "dabbling" with Rust was actually quite smooth. I try to stick to functional style where possible, exhaustive pattern matching, everything wrapped in Result/Option, etc - eliminates the need of unit testing in many cases.