Discussions of dependent types often assume they're all about specification and proof. That's part of it, but not the most interesting bit.
-
-
Sometimes this involves proving things. Perhaps as complicated as: “if x is in the list xs, it's also in the list xs ++ ys”
Show this thread -
As understanding of a problem develops, types get refined to better explain what's going on. Not necessarily bigger, just better. We're going to need much better editing and refactoring tools than we currently have, though, to do this well.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Excellent naming there, Brady the Code.
-
You’ve got to have a system.
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.