sdfsfsf3kjdf

5 ms·

1.
by sdfsfsf3kjdf 6y ago
Sure, it's definitely something worth taking into consideration, I just wouldn't value it too highly and in many cases I think there are much better indicators of ability.
2.
by sdfsfsf3kjdf 6y ago
> I imagine the developer pool is much smaller but the candidates are higher quality People always say this about their favorite niche language and it always feels a little too self serving with little evidence to back it up. Learning la
3.
by sdfsfsf3kjdf 6y ago
> but the longer your repl session is open and the more you change and compile, the more likely you are going to end up with a mixed state in memory that does not reflect how your program would behave if run from scratch. I've seen
4.
by sdfsfsf3kjdf 6y ago
Extremely shallow criticism based off of little more than personal anecdotes.
5.
by sdfsfsf3kjdf 6y ago
In Rust you can solve this via derive or a macro. Typescript's conditional types and the associated utility types are a nice solution to this problem as well. You can do a ton with Partial, Required, Pick, Omit, Exclude etc.
6.
by sdfsfsf3kjdf 6y ago
How exactly are you going to implement a type safe option type without generics? You either have to use interface{}, which is obviously not type safe, or write/generate an option type for every type contained within it. Sum types are a
7.
by sdfsfsf3kjdf 6y ago
> Is that not what generics would fix? No. That would be fixed by having something akin to typeclasses, traits or interfaces. Elm's List, Maybe and Array are all defined using a generic type parameter.
8.
by sdfsfsf3kjdf 6y ago
> Well, I just come from a Elm gig and I must say I was not too bothered with the lack of generics there. Elm has generics.