News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on What else are we getting wrong about programming languages?. Parent comment

Re:What else are we getting wrong about programming languages? by cndkxjsnf on Sunday October 30, 2016 @05:23PM (#12832420)
>Another order reversal: type systems allow you to focus on programming, instead of hunting around for bugs

Except that is false. Bug prevalence is empirically orthogonal to type system.

See Xmonad

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:What else are we getting wrong about programming languages? by tines on Sunday October 30, 2016 @05:31PM (#12832469)
But this is in deployment software, i.e. I interpret your assertion as meaning "bug prevalence in software after it has been debugged is the same regardless of type system." My argument is that, at least for me, code becomes bug-free faster with static types than with dynamic, not that it ends up more bug-free in the end.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:What else are we getting wrong about programming languages? by dancek on Sunday October 30, 2016 @05:36PM (#12832487)
Are you saying that Xmonad is buggy? I never realized that, but I'm quite new to it. I'd think I've seen other window managers crash with similar amount of use, though.

Or are you saying that Xmonad is not buggy? But then I don't understand how it relates to empirical orthogonality at all.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:What else are we getting wrong about programming languages? by taeric on Sunday October 30, 2016 @07:06PM (#12833061)
Window managers crash often? I can't think of the last time I saw one do so.
[ Parent | on HN ]