Strong typing, a hill I'm willing to die on

Re:Strong typing, a hill I'm willing to die on by pfdietz on Wednesday October 04, 2023 @02:20PM (#37769415)

You seem to be thinking that testing for type errors is something additional to general testing. It's not. With sufficiently strong logic testing, the testing for type errors comes along for free.

The analogy with driving doesn't make much sense. After all, accidents sometimes happen without the driver being to blame, and the marginal cost of putting on a seat belt is very low.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Strong typing, a hill I'm willing to die on by mejutoco on Wednesday October 04, 2023 @05:02PM (#37771744)

With sufficiently adequate drivers seatbelts are superfluous indeed.

Apart from an analogy is a template of your argument. It is the logic of the argument itself.

Errors also happen sometimes without type systems being to blame (they only catch a subset of errors).

The marginal costs of a type system is usually very low too, so it seems to be a great fit.

[ Parent | on HN ]