On Thursday, 5 June 2014 at 09:43:13 UTC, Jonathan M Davis via
Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
Though I confess what horrifies me the most about dynamic
languages is code
like this
if(cond)
var = "hello world";
else
var = 42;
The fact that an if statement could change the type of a
va
On 17/06/2014 07:21, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
On 16/06/14 16:00, Bruno Medeiros wrote:
I sometimes tried to convince dynamic language proponents - the ones
that write unittests at least - of the benefits of static typing, by
stating that static typing is really just "compile time unit-tests"! (it
On 16/06/14 16:00, Bruno Medeiros wrote:
I sometimes tried to convince dynamic language proponents - the ones
that write unittests at least - of the benefits of static typing, by
stating that static typing is really just "compile time unit-tests"! (it
is actually)
You can actually do compile t
On 6/16/2014 10:00 AM, Bruno Medeiros wrote:
Java, which dynamic
language proponents like to bash for it's verbosity
Static language proponents like to bash Java for its verbosity, too!
On 05/06/2014 08:30, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 6/5/14, 7:59 AM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
So let me get this straight: There are programmers out there who find
the occasional type annotations on some declarations to be significantly
more work than following a convention of nearly *quadrupling*
On 6/10/14, 6:28 AM, Mattcoder wrote:
Andrei's D Talk (Day 2) is up:
http://channel9.msdn.com/Events/Lang-NEXT/Lang-NEXT-2014/D
Matheus.
Topics overlap a tad with NDC's so if you watched that you may want to
skip over the portion between 7:41 and 15:42.
Andrei
Andrei's D Talk (Day 2) is up:
http://channel9.msdn.com/Events/Lang-NEXT/Lang-NEXT-2014/D
Matheus.
Burp:
Do you also have so much testing code in haskell?
I am still a newbie in Haskell, so my Haskell usage patterns are
not significant (but if you still want an answer: from what I've
seen so far I need so much time and thinking to craft every
single line of Haskell code that later tests
bearophile-
Do you also have so much testing code in haskell?
In my D code I have an average 2.5 lines of testing code or
every 1 line of D code, probably thanks to the stronger typing
of D (and I think my D/Python code is less buggy than Phobos).
Bye,
bearophile
On Wednesday, 4 June 2014 at 22:02:37 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
Yeah, I'm generally against it... but I have a weird view of
typing.
The way I see it, you should go either strong and static or
dynamic and weak - I hate the middle ground.
So, in my view:
Best (like D):
string a = "10"; int b
On Wednesday, 4 June 2014 at 06:19:05 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/27911b/conversation_with_andrei_alexandrescu_all_things/
Andrei
OK I noticed that I messed up in answering.
I was saying that you 2 seems to be confused between LLVM and
clang.
On Thursday, 5 June 2014 at 13:32:16 UTC, Bill Baxter via
Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 2:42 AM, Jonathan M Davis via
Digitalmars-d-announce
wrote:
Though I confess what horrifies me the most about dynamic
languages is code
like this
if(cond)
var = "hello world"
On Thu, 05 Jun 2014 12:46:23 +
Atila Neves via Digitalmars-d-announce
wrote:
> On Thursday, 5 June 2014 at 09:43:13 UTC, Jonathan M Davis via
> Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
> > On Thu, 05 Jun 2014 09:30:44 +0200
> > Though I confess what horrifies me the most about dynamic
> > languages is c
On 2014-06-05 15:31, Bill Baxter via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 2:42 AM, Jonathan M Davis via
Digitalmars-d-announce mailto:digitalmars-d-announce@puremagic.com>> wrote:
Though I confess what horrifies me the most about dynamic languages
is code
like this
On 6/5/2014 6:31 AM, Bill Baxter via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
But when it comes to tests, it's very convenient to just be able to fake
any object by slapping some dummy functions in between curly braces. For
example if I want a fake "IWidthHaver" instance, I just have to write x = {
wi
On Thursday, 5 June 2014 at 13:34:03 UTC, Brian Rogoff wrote:
On Thursday, 5 June 2014 at 12:46:24 UTC, Atila Neves wrote:
I don't know, but the only language I've used with no static
types that made me comfortable was Common Lisp. That was a
long time ago, but I think it was the ease of manual
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 6:34 AM, Brian Rogoff via Digitalmars-d-announce <
digitalmars-d-announce@puremagic.com> wrote:
> ML is the language of the future ;-)
>
>
Yeh, it hasn't really caught on in the first 40 years since it was
invented, but I'm sure it's about to explode any day now. :-)
--bb
On Thursday, 5 June 2014 at 12:46:24 UTC, Atila Neves wrote:
I don't know, but the only language I've used with no static
types that made me comfortable was Common Lisp. That was a long
time ago, but I think it was the ease of manually testing the
code in a REPL that did it. Obviously today I'd
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 2:42 AM, Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d-announce
wrote:
>
> Though I confess what horrifies me the most about dynamic languages is code
> like this
>
> if(cond)
> var = "hello world";
> else
> var = 42;
>
> The fact that an if statement could change the type of
On Thursday, 5 June 2014 at 09:43:13 UTC, Jonathan M Davis via
Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
if(cond)
var = "hello world";
else
var = 42;
I've sometimes wished for this functionality. It's not even a big
deal in a statically typed language with built-in algebraic types
and flow-based
On Thursday, 5 June 2014 at 09:43:13 UTC, Jonathan M Davis via
Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
On Thu, 05 Jun 2014 09:30:44 +0200
Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d-announce
wrote:
On 6/5/14, 7:59 AM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> So let me get this straight: There are programmers out there
> who
Am 05.06.2014 11:42, schrieb Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d-announce:
if(cond)
var = "hello world";
else
var = 42;
The fact that an if statement could change the type of a variable is just
atrocious IMHO. Maybe I've just spent too much of my time in statically typed
languages, but
On Thu, 05 Jun 2014 09:30:44 +0200
Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d-announce
wrote:
> On 6/5/14, 7:59 AM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> > So let me get this straight: There are programmers out there who
> > find the occasional type annotations on some declarations to be
> > significantly more wor
On 2014-06-04 21:30, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
In my experience, using heavy dynamic typing throughout a program
creates far more work (mainly debugging) than it avoids. Even in tiny
~100 line programs, I've spent large amounts of time tracking down bugs
a sane compiler would have immediately point
On 2014-06-05 09:30, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
I have to confess this echoes a few similar confusions I have about the
use and advocacy of dynamically-typed languages. One argument I've heard
a while back was that static type errors are not "proportional response"
and that static types only det
Nick Sabalausky:
to three lines of tests for every one line of real code is
considered rapid development,
My Python development is just development, it's not meant to be
particularly rapid :-)
And I don't think a 3:1 ratio is too much. Among the testing code
I also count the doctests, the
On 6/5/14, 7:59 AM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
So let me get this straight: There are programmers out there who find
the occasional type annotations on some declarations to be significantly
more work than following a convention of nearly *quadrupling* the amount
of code they have to write? Two to thr
On 6/4/2014 3:43 PM, bearophile wrote:
Nick Sabalausky:
In my experience, using heavy dynamic typing throughout a program
creates far more work (mainly debugging) than it avoids. Even in tiny
~100 line programs, I've spent large amounts of time tracking down
bugs a sane compiler would have imme
On Wednesday, 4 June 2014 at 22:13:33 UTC, Ary Borenszweig wrote:
On 6/4/14, 6:11 PM, Craig Dillabaugh wrote:
On Wednesday, 4 June 2014 at 20:10:51 UTC, Ary Borenszweig
wrote:
On 6/4/14, 3:33 PM, Craig Dillabaugh wrote:
On Wednesday, 4 June 2014 at 17:31:56 UTC, Ary Borenszweig
wrote:
On 6/4/
On Wed, Jun 04, 2014 at 19:13:32 -0300, Ary Borenszweig via
Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
> The problem comes when you need to refactor your code and swap one type
> for another. You have to change all ocurrences of that type in that
> situation for another.
That's what polymorphism and type in
On 6/4/14, 6:11 PM, Craig Dillabaugh wrote:
On Wednesday, 4 June 2014 at 20:10:51 UTC, Ary Borenszweig wrote:
On 6/4/14, 3:33 PM, Craig Dillabaugh wrote:
On Wednesday, 4 June 2014 at 17:31:56 UTC, Ary Borenszweig wrote:
On 6/4/14, 1:27 PM, Meta wrote:
On Wednesday, 4 June 2014 at 06:19:05 UTC
On Wednesday, 4 June 2014 at 21:02:21 UTC, Craig Dillabaugh wrote:
However, my primary point was that adding a string to a number
is really an 'undefined' operation. So I don't think such
automatic casting is (generally) helpful.
Yeah, I'm generally against it... but I have a weird view of
ty
On Wednesday, 4 June 2014 at 20:10:51 UTC, Ary Borenszweig wrote:
On 6/4/14, 3:33 PM, Craig Dillabaugh wrote:
On Wednesday, 4 June 2014 at 17:31:56 UTC, Ary Borenszweig
wrote:
On 6/4/14, 1:27 PM, Meta wrote:
On Wednesday, 4 June 2014 at 06:19:05 UTC, Andrei
Alexandrescu wrote:
clip
But us
On Wednesday, 4 June 2014 at 18:54:00 UTC, Andrew Edwards wrote:
On 6/4/14, 2:37 PM, Craig Dillabaugh wrote:
On Wednesday, 4 June 2014 at 18:14:22 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Wednesday, 4 June 2014 at 18:03:48 UTC, Ary Borenszweig
wrote:
clip
But shouldn't the '26' be '1016'?
That should
On Wednesday, 4 June 2014 at 20:10:51 UTC, Ary Borenszweig wrote:
I was actually talking about having to specify types
everywhere, like in function signatures, the fields of classes
and structs, etc.
You can still have a language that feels dynamic but is
statically typed. The compiler catche
On 6/4/14, 3:33 PM, Craig Dillabaugh wrote:
On Wednesday, 4 June 2014 at 17:31:56 UTC, Ary Borenszweig wrote:
On 6/4/14, 1:27 PM, Meta wrote:
On Wednesday, 4 June 2014 at 06:19:05 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/27911b/conversation_with_andrei_alexa
On Wednesday, 4 June 2014 at 19:43:53 UTC, bearophile wrote:
Nick Sabalausky:
In my experience, using heavy dynamic typing throughout a
program creates far more work (mainly debugging) than it
avoids. Even in tiny ~100 line programs, I've spent large
amounts of time tracking down bugs a sane
Nick Sabalausky:
In my experience, using heavy dynamic typing throughout a
program creates far more work (mainly debugging) than it
avoids. Even in tiny ~100 line programs, I've spent large
amounts of time tracking down bugs a sane compiler would have
immediately pointed out with a comparativ
On 6/4/2014 2:33 PM, Craig Dillabaugh wrote:
But using function templates and the like you can still get fairly
'Python-like' code in D. I find dealing with types to be one of the
areas that requires the 'least' amount of mental effort in software
development. I don't understand why people see
On 6/4/14, 2:37 PM, Craig Dillabaugh wrote:
On Wednesday, 4 June 2014 at 18:14:22 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Wednesday, 4 June 2014 at 18:03:48 UTC, Ary Borenszweig wrote:
clip
void main() {
var a = 10;
var b = "20";
b += a;
b -= 4;
import std.stdio;
On Wednesday, 4 June 2014 at 18:29:49 UTC, bearophile wrote:
Haskell programmers have a very different attitude toward types.
Aye, that's more like how I prefer to do it - I like to use
separate types for virtually everything in real code.
On Wednesday, 4 June 2014 at 18:37:24 UTC, Craig Dillabaugh wrote:
But shouldn't the '26' be '1016'?
In javascript it would, but I hate that so I did something more
sane: + always coerces both operands to be numbers, then adds
them. To get concat, we use the D operator ~.
On Wednesday, 4 June 2014 at 18:14:22 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Wednesday, 4 June 2014 at 18:03:48 UTC, Ary Borenszweig
wrote:
clip
void main() {
var a = 10;
var b = "20";
b += a;
b -= 4;
import std.stdio;
writeln(b);
b = [1,2,3];
On Wednesday, 4 June 2014 at 17:31:56 UTC, Ary Borenszweig wrote:
On 6/4/14, 1:27 PM, Meta wrote:
On Wednesday, 4 June 2014 at 06:19:05 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/27911b/conversation_with_andrei_alexandrescu_all_things/
Andrei
When that pers
Adam D. Ruppe:
Of course, sometimes the type still matters,
Haskell programmers have a very different attitude toward types.
They do a kind of type-driven programming, even in small
programs. They lay down the data types (like the algebraic data
types that describe the data structures of th
On Wednesday, 4 June 2014 at 18:03:48 UTC, Ary Borenszweig wrote:
Cool! It also looks nice too.
you should check out my jsvar too
https://github.com/adamdruppe/arsd/blob/master/jsvar.d
weak typing and dynamic like javascript:
import arsd.jsvar;
void main() {
var a = 10;
var
On Wednesday, 4 June 2014 at 18:01:04 UTC, dennis luehring wrote:
Am 04.06.2014 19:57, schrieb Meta:
On Wednesday, 4 June 2014 at 17:55:15 UTC, bearophile wrote:
How many good usages of D Variant do you know?
Bye,
bearophile
It depends on what you mean by a good usage. I rarely ever use
Vari
Am 04.06.2014 19:57, schrieb Meta:
On Wednesday, 4 June 2014 at 17:55:15 UTC, bearophile wrote:
How many good usages of D Variant do you know?
Bye,
bearophile
It depends on what you mean by a good usage. I rarely ever use
Variant, but you *can* use it if you need weak and/or dynamic
typing.
On 6/4/14, 2:59 PM, Meta wrote:
On Wednesday, 4 June 2014 at 17:57:40 UTC, Ary Borenszweig wrote:
Even in function signatures?
alias var = std.variant.Variant;
auto DoStuff(var x, var y)
{
//Do stuff with x and y
}
Cool! It also looks nice too.
On 6/4/14, 2:50 PM, Meta wrote:
On Wednesday, 4 June 2014 at 17:31:56 UTC, Ary Borenszweig wrote:
You still have to worry about types, though.
Yes, but you can often get away without explicitly writing types in D,
and there's always std.variant.Variant when you don't want to bother
with them.
On Wednesday, 4 June 2014 at 17:55:15 UTC, bearophile wrote:
How many good usages of D Variant do you know?
Bye,
bearophile
It depends on what you mean by a good usage. I rarely ever use
Variant, but you *can* use it if you need weak and/or dynamic
typing.
On Wednesday, 4 June 2014 at 17:57:40 UTC, Ary Borenszweig wrote:
Even in function signatures?
alias var = std.variant.Variant;
auto DoStuff(var x, var y)
{
//Do stuff with x and y
}
Meta:
and there's always std.variant.Variant when you don't want to
bother with them.
How many good usages of D Variant do you know?
Bye,
bearophile
On Wednesday, 4 June 2014 at 17:31:56 UTC, Ary Borenszweig wrote:
You still have to worry about types, though.
Yes, but you can often get away without explicitly writing types
in D, and there's always std.variant.Variant when you don't want
to bother with them.
On 6/4/14, 1:27 PM, Meta wrote:
On Wednesday, 4 June 2014 at 06:19:05 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/27911b/conversation_with_andrei_alexandrescu_all_things/
Andrei
When that person made the statement about expressing his mental model in
a simple
On 6/4/2014 4:27 AM, w0rp wrote:
On Wednesday, 4 June 2014 at 06:19:05 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/27911b/conversation_with_andrei_alexandrescu_all_things/
Andrei
I never post on Reddit myself, but I noticed the guy asking about Qt ports.
Some
On Wednesday, 4 June 2014 at 06:19:05 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/27911b/conversation_with_andrei_alexandrescu_all_things/
Andrei
When that person made the statement about expressing his mental
model in a simpler way that is still somewhat fast
On Wednesday, 4 June 2014 at 06:19:05 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/27911b/conversation_with_andrei_alexandrescu_all_things/
Andrei
I never post on Reddit myself, but I noticed the guy asking about
Qt ports. Someone else can tell him about my wor
On 6/4/2014 2:08 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
FWIW I'm not sure high resolution is necessary or recommended when watching me
:o). -- Andrei
I look better at low res.
On 6/4/14, 9:33 AM, Joakim wrote:
On Wednesday, 4 June 2014 at 06:19:05 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/27911b/conversation_with_andrei_alexandrescu_all_things/
wtf, the "Mid Quality" video is 1280x720 resolution HD video, guess they
think every pr
On Wed, 04 Jun 2014 07:33:01 +
Joakim via Digitalmars-d-announce
wrote:
> On Wednesday, 4 June 2014 at 06:19:05 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
> wrote:
> > http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/27911b/conversation_with_andrei_alexandrescu_all_things/
>
> wtf, the "Mid Quality" video is 1280x
On Wednesday, 4 June 2014 at 06:19:05 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/27911b/conversation_with_andrei_alexandrescu_all_things/
wtf, the "Mid Quality" video is 1280x720 resolution HD video,
guess they think every programmer has a super-fast internet
62 matches
Mail list logo
