On Aug 13, 2008, at 11:44 PM, Brendan Eich wrote: > I've written that interoperation problems could result if different > browsers used different degrees of conservatism and partial > evaluation, but I don't expect static checker extensions in most > browsers, and I'm also not too worried about people testing in the > more lenient one where the stricter one has enough market share for > the interop failure to be a problem. The issue will be what works in > browsers with their dynamic type checking (whatever it ends up being).
I think my lack of PLT background is seeping through here, so I'll clarify a bit. It sounds like static type checking infers a certain amount of "hard failure," i.e. you can't run this until you fix your code. That's not really what I'm voting for. I just want it to be possible, somehow, to catch simple type errors very early in the development process, and then to run the same type annotated code unchanged in the browser. To that end an offline lint-like tool would suffice. If type-annotated ES-Harmony is capable of supporting that, I'll be satisfied. I'm not a member of the "our language knows what's best for you" camp. I just want another tool for my tool belt, to use judiciously for my own purposes without impacting others. _______________________________________________ Es4-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es4-discuss
