News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Nimrod: A New Approach to Metaprogramming [video] by pjmlp on Thursday January 16, 2014 @05:47PM (#7073038)
On the other hand when looking at type X you don't don't which set of interfaces it supports.

Not very good for large scale programming, I would say.

As for comparing with Java, well, yes it is true.

However there are plenty of strong typed languages which offer similar capabilities.

Re:Nimrod: A New Approach to Metaprogramming [video] by skybrian on Thursday January 16, 2014 @07:17PM (#7073421)
I don't think it matters that much from a library maintainer's point of view.

If you you want to change a public method and can find all the type's usages, an IDE or search engine can tell you which call sites will break. (Or just compile everything and see what happens.)

If you can't find all the type's usages, you're screwed anyway because any change that would break an interface will also break a call site that calls a method directly, without using an interface. So having all the interfaces declared right there doesn't help that much.

Re:Nimrod: A New Approach to Metaprogramming [video] by pjmlp on Friday January 17, 2014 @02:15AM (#7074685)
> I don't think it matters that much from a library maintainer's point of view

From a large scale application developer point of view it matters a lot.

In code bases developed by 50+ developers across multiple sites, it is important to be able to look to a struct definition and be aware what interfaces in the code base are supported.