I had some really weird thoughts about programming the other day.
-
-
Replying to @nouswaves
(1) Non-intuitive aspect: dropping an apple onto another apple requires a change of type, and alters the operations that can be performed.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @nouswaves
Isn't an apple a list of apples containing only one apple? And shouldn't a list of one thing allow us to access it without an index?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @nouswaves
And if there is no apple why make it null. Couldn't it just be an empty list of apples.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @nouswaves
(2) Why should we manually update function signatures? Couldn't we auto-generate them from the body.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @nouswaves
@nouswaves Are you thinking about something distinct from (Haskell-style) type inference?1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @othercriteria
@othercriteria It was in relation to traditional enterprisey type systems. However the point is actually about visualising type inferences.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
@othercriteria Maybe there are IDEs that visualise type inferences...
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.