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.
I have the strongest of all compilers: it rejects all the programs. Every program it accepts is 100% bug-free for whatever purpose anyone wants.
-
-
Clever, if it wasn't such a fallacy in our context. Okay, let me turn it around. Claim: Any breaking change you make is fine as long as, for users, 1) it's caught by the compiler and 2) admits a semi-automatic fix. Stronger tools, easier refactoring. Fact of "life".
-
Again, breaking changes in the Swift language and standard library are a perfect example. They ship the changes _and_ the tools to port your code. I happen to prefer that over the Java model, a lot. So much library code in Java is stuck in 2005, if that ...
- 6 more replies
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!
