There is no limit to the amount of machinery that developers will create to avoid: 1. Adding a function parameter 2. Passing a function parameter 3. Applying a function 4. Composing a function See: DI, implicits, subtyping, lawless type classes, and so much more.
-
Show this thread
-
-
-
Replying to @jdegoes @flusteredcat
Unless you're using a language with dependent types, no type class has any enforced laws.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Ngnghm @flusteredcat
We try to prove the laws aren't satisfied via property checks, which provides evidence of correctness—the laws just aren't enforced at compile time. But some type classes have no laws to check.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @jdegoes @flusteredcat
What? Dynamic type checking? Next thing we know, you'll be writing type classes in Lisp…https://github.com/fare/lil-ilc2012 …
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Has anyone tried the LIL approach in Clojure?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
Not that I know. Think of it as an opportunity!
8:34 PM - 7 Jun 2018
0 replies
0 retweets
0 likes
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
Read my blog!