The smallest type change make entire APIs incompatible, hence a lot of pain in OCaml: forced upgrades, forced downgrades, crazy version update schedules, extra forks, reluctance to fix bad early choices that would break compatibility, etc. Types DIRECTLY cause library badness.
-
-
Most programming languages gain such patterns as they mature. OCaml certainly has its approaches. Whether a maintainer follows them? If Erlang and Lisp have an advantage, it's the ability to adapt reflectively rather than blindly depend on a maintainer.
-
I'd like to reiterate that reflection and types are entirely orthogonal design decisions. E.g. It's quite possible to have dynamically languages with no "isString?" method, or statically typed languages that provide rich reflective metaprogramming.
End of conversation
New conversation -
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!