Re: Addressing Matthias Felleisen's concerns?

2016-11-05 Thread Didier
Cool, I'm looking forward to it. Seems like that would greatly enhance TypedClojure's usefulness. On Monday, 9 May 2016 15:44:46 UTC-7, Ambrose Bonnaire-Sergeant wrote: > > Josh is correct. I'm currently working on merging this work now that my > courses are over. > > Thanks, > Ambrose > > On

Re: Addressing Matthias Felleisen's concerns?

2016-05-09 Thread Ambrose Bonnaire-Sergeant
Josh is correct. I'm currently working on merging this work now that my courses are over. Thanks, Ambrose On Mon, May 9, 2016 at 6:32 PM, Josh Tilles wrote: > On Monday, May 9, 2016 at 5:36:53 PM UTC-4, Didier wrote: >> >> At Clojurewest 2016, Matthias Felleisen gave a

Re: Addressing Matthias Felleisen's concerns?

2016-05-09 Thread Josh Tilles
On Monday, May 9, 2016 at 5:36:53 PM UTC-4, Didier wrote: > > At Clojurewest 2016, Matthias Felleisen gave a great keynote about the > pragmatism of soundness for maintening large code bases. He mentioned that > adding type gradually was useful, but only when the border between typed > land and

Re: Addressing Matthias Felleisen's concerns?

2016-05-09 Thread Raoul Duke
(Did he mention Wadler? Probably. http://lambda-the-ultimate.org/node/2538) I have it from friends who have used TR "in anger" that it is not really a win. My own experience with other things, e.g. the typed stuff in the lands of JavaScript and TypedLua, is in line with that, unfortunately.

Addressing Matthias Felleisen's concerns?

2016-05-09 Thread Didier
At Clojurewest 2016, Matthias Felleisen gave a great keynote about the pragmatism of soundness for maintening large code bases. He mentioned that adding type gradually was useful, but only when the border between typed land and untyped land is guarded. He mentioned how Racket does that. He also