News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Diminishing returns of static typing. Parent comment

Re:Diminishing returns of static typing by TheDong on Monday October 02, 2017 @01:42PM (#15386014)
Type inference goes hand-in-hand with static typing. Those are not opposite things.

> C# .... Crystal

Both are fully statically typed languages with type inference. Those are unrelated to the argument the parent comment is making.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Diminishing returns of static typing by andybak on Monday October 02, 2017 @06:54PM (#15388684)
> Type inference goes hand-in-hand with static typing.

That would imply there's no type inference possible with dynamic languages - either at "compile" time or run time.

(Wouldn't it also imply that static typing and strong typing are synonymous?)

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Diminishing returns of static typing by jaggederest on Monday October 02, 2017 @02:34PM (#15386515)
They still both allow generic arguments, in reduction, this means that they still have uncertainty.

I can and have built a totally untyped language within a fully statically typed language - nostrademons' Scheme-in-haskell exercise is a lot of fun.

You just have to define a Universal type and then back out of all that nasty compile-time nonsense. Everything is Univ and Univ is everything.

[ Parent | on HN ]