Attention big data scientists (™): there are more types than numbers and strings.
-
-
@avibryant I guess the obvious answers are unit, tuple (cons), function. Then you can make a lisp and you're good. -
@posco that's a cop out, but I'll accept it. -
@avibryant@posco Even cons is unnecessary via Church pairs :) For multivariate stats I think ~10 types are "enough". Relational, no idea.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
@avibryant@posco another question, why didn't the world evolve to assertions on data besides types? Why did we stop at just type safety? -
@BigDataSc@avibryant there were many attempts at contracts: you give pre & post conditions on the data. Types are cheaper: no runtime cost. -
@posco@BigDataSc@avibryant There is interesting stuff happening in the area of practical dependent typing though... http://www.idris-lang.org/example/ -
@stuhood@BigDataSc@avibryant how is the performance of Idris? -
@posco@BigDataSc@avibryant No idea. Validation is at compile time tho, which means that in most cases you don't need bounds checks/guards.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
@avibryant@posco Tuples and (generalised) Either + generics. Tuple = and. Either = or. But that's probably not the types you had in mind.Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.