Follow
"what's a good general-purpose programming language?"
@worldsendless @lupyuen I heard many people this, "This enables you to catch many bugs before running your application". It is accurate; however, after debugging my Rust library, I produced more bugs than a compiler can catch. So I ended up implementing unit tests. Defining types and fixing them is time-consuming. So I spent more time implementing the Rust version than the Clojure version. 😪
Anyways, I still code in Rust because my library ran many times faster than one in Clojure. 🙀
Anyways, I still code in Rust because my library ran many times faster than one in Clojure. 🙀
@worldsendless @lupyuen It is a shame that I didn't try clj-kondo yet. 🤦🏾♂️
I have a high hope in static analysis tools for dynamic typing languages.
https://github.com/clj-kondo/clj-kondo/blob/master/doc/types.md
I have a high hope in static analysis tools for dynamic typing languages.
https://github.com/clj-kondo/clj-kondo/blob/master/doc/types.md
@lupyuen I didn't expect the compiler emphasis, though. Funny twist there. I think web devs like me don't so often think of that.
Yeah. A TDD design gives types and then instances of types. It is in everyday programmers hands, so it is not as often logically sound, as a type system outside of direct human contact would be. But it is a lot better than people give it credit for.
@lupyuen Interesting read! Thanks. I am partial to Clojure and the lisps, which he doesn't mention -- lisps might fall behind his call for "modern" languages (because of their age, though this is actually a bad indicator for them), and Clojure definitely disagrees with him about types, but strong agreement on immutability and functional thinking.