> It doesn't mean your program is correct, but that it could possibly be correct... | Hacker News

Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit

		s_kilk on March 7, 2015 \| parent \| context \| favorite \| on: My Weird Ruby > It doesn't mean your program is correct, but that it could possibly be correct. That doesn't seem very useful, I already know that my program could "possibly" be correct. If I didn't think so I wouldn't be working on it. I'm interested in finding out whether it "is" correct or not. If I ask the type system, and it just shrugs and says "dunno lol" then that type system isn't worth much to me.

phamilton on March 7, 2015 [–]

It ends up being pretty useful. The number of times it catches problems is pretty high. Also, the more you annotate, the greater the efficacy.

Is it inferior to a full static route system? Yes. Are there benefits to dynamic type systems? Yes. Success typing is a way to get a bit a both.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact