News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Go says Wat by coldtea on Friday September 07, 2018 @08:21AM (#17933665)
>A lot of WATs are more bad practice than problems in the language, IMO (like WAT 8, modifying the return value twice in deferred functions, with the order being significant: who the hell writes such a code?)

Isn't that the tired old argument from the C camp? "If you are careful you can write perfectly fine C without bugs".

DUH!

The whole idea is for the compiler and types to catch as much of this crap as possible, not to add accidental mental burden to the programmer.

Re:Go says Wat by SOLAR_FIELDS on Friday September 07, 2018 @10:20AM (#17934397)
While I agree that compiler should eventually be updated to prevent this sort of behavior or something similar, I agree with the grandparent here. I had same sentiment as the grandparent, in that for several of these errors, if you end up causing them it just belies a lack of understanding of software development in general. It’s great if we can improve compilers to teach people about these sort of behaviors, but they don’t really fall under the definition of WAT that I think is being referenced in the article. That is, a WAT behavior like this is something you would normally expect to behave in a certain way, but because of some language idiosyncrasy or design decision in the language it actually does something different.