1/ One of the most interesting insights from taking a program analysis class: I used to think type systems were just a way to restrict the values of variables... But you can also view them as a super-lightweight formal proof system! That can check many useful properties
-
-
Inference is supposed to be a black box. But when it fails, the user inevitably needs to know how it works to avoid trial and error. These systems need to be able to explain themselves, interactively teach their mechanics.
-
Yeah, I really like the idea of allowing the user to pop the hood. Could be fun to try a naive thing like just show a graph representation of the constraints. Probably horrifyingly large for real programs, but maybe you can prune? And then link to the source somehow too?
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Yeah, was just thinking about locating type errors: * are there better heuristics for localizing? * could you use edit history to inform the guess? the error is probably in that new code you just typed... * could visualize the constraint set to help user figure out the issue?
-
Apparently I need to learn what a bidirectional type system is...pic.twitter.com/CBq1XvZgBS
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.
cognitive psychology. PhD
