Again, of course this is true. But type systems that in practice lean a lot on dynamic casts are playing a shell game with complexity that at least in my experience doesn't result in a type system that is as cognitively as simple as the formal model would imply.
And I also think that the syntax has a very significant impact on the understandability of these systems.
-
-
I think the issues with syntax can't be addressed without first figuring out what semantics you want, which is still unclear in many cases.
-
Also I think you and I may mean different things by "syntax".
-
What's your definition?
-
What order the tokens go in and how they're spelled.
-
I am also including what the syntax attempts to express and how it is understood by human programmers.
-
Right, that was my expectation.
-
What do you call this extension?
-
The language. ;) Less flippantly, I'd say that I don't think we can draw a line that's concretely about "what people write down" that's separate from the rest of the language design.
- 6 more replies
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.