Re:Haskell in Production: The good, the bad, and the ugly
by to3m on Wednesday October 31, 2012 @08:41AM
(#4722499)
Type error: "everyday" is an adjective, adverb expected in this context ;)
The examples you cite would be detected by a type checker. The attribute errors wouldn't even need a complicated one. (I've never had an attribute error in C.) It's fine to complain that these things are due to bad architecture, in whatever way that might be, but if there were a type checker involved then the code wouldn't even build if there were a type problem. It's fine to rail against poor design, or systems that are hard to use for no good reason, but in the mean time the code usually has to actually work.
(And if there were no type problems, it would run fine without one, bad architecture or no.)
The examples you cite would be detected by a type checker. The attribute errors wouldn't even need a complicated one. (I've never had an attribute error in C.) It's fine to complain that these things are due to bad architecture, in whatever way that might be, but if there were a type checker involved then the code wouldn't even build if there were a type problem. It's fine to rail against poor design, or systems that are hard to use for no good reason, but in the mean time the code usually has to actually work.
(And if there were no type problems, it would run fine without one, bad architecture or no.)