I am not well versed in Haskell, but wasn't the original also computing the solution with just the type system?
Yup
I know my mind is decidedly poisoned when I could follow the type definitions perfectly, and they reminded me of certain types I have written myself… ah, TypeScript, what have you done to me…
How does one even come close to such wizardry
Going deep into conditional types, and trying to contort Typescript into a dependent type system despite the fact it is not one!
Re:TypeScripting the Technical Interview
by WorldMaker on Tuesday March 14, 2023 @03:21PM
(#35157001)
Deep diving into lib.d.ts and DefinitelyTyped dealing with the weird boundary space between poorly typed JS and strongly typed TS can teach a lot these days.
Also, being able to recognize the Peano S-function on sight (and thus uses of Church-Peano numbers) is a fun part of that wizardry. (Maybe not necessary to remind the usefulness of the Lambda Calculus canon on a site named after one of the most famous combinators.)
Re:TypeScripting the Technical Interview
by blauditore on Sunday March 12, 2023 @06:44PM
(#35127367)
The final punch line is that types vanish and the compiled code is effectively useless.
The part about using the typescript language server to compute the solution, and the protagonist claiming the code is "concise" because only 4 lines of javascript were generated, was absolutely brilliant. Cracked me up at least.
Glancing at the actual code, I admit I'm with Criss in my ability to follow the logic, but it doesn't look like a direct translation from Haskel types to Typescript types either.
At any rate, very well done.