@rickasaurus @tunixman The ability to do some arbitrary thing is not an argument in favour of utility.
-
-
Replying to @dibblego1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
-
Replying to @rickasaurus
@rickasaurus@tunixman anything you do with that silliness can always be done better without it. EVERY TIME. Yes it is arbitrary.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @rickasaurus
@rickasaurus@tunixman didn't bite me, just glad I can take advantage of the one thing Java got right.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @dibblego
@dibblego@rickasaurus@tunixman hey, I can still get type information at runtime, just not all of it. Should get rid of more :)2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @copumpkin
@copumpkin@dibblego@tunixman who says you couldn't prove a program is correct at runtime if you leave holes to fill?1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @rickasaurus
@rickasaurus@dibblego@tunixman we just like the guarantees of parametricity, which is explicitly about disallowing knowledge of that sort.4 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @copumpkin
@copumpkin@rickasaurus@tunixman Parametricity is a ubiquitous programming technique that is destroyed by these type system shenanigans.2 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.