I wonder how much of making invalid states unrepresentable is really future-proofing?
-
Show this thread
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @jdegoes
The issue I see is: the variability of what needs to be undone when requirements change. As an analogy, a hammer that is typed only to hit nails is likely over-specified.
7 replies 4 retweets 7 likes -
Replying to @mfeathers @jdegoes
"requirements change" is one of the most compelling reasons to use types. I won't use vague analogies to demonstrate this.
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likes -
You kind of want to eliminate all of the ambiguity and uncertainty, right?
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
Replying to @mfeathers @jdegoes
I do, up to the point of, "what I know now", then quickly and reliably adapt when I learn new information i.e. requirements change. This requires a sufficiently capable type system, of course.
1:12 PM - 28 Jan 2019
0 replies
0 retweets
1 like
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.