Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

You still have to keep type information in your head when working with static programs. Compiling isn't all that you do with programs.

Not every expression in a program is rife with explicitly visible type. Not even in a language with declarations for all storage locations. Type inference seeks to minimize that, because it's considered clutter.

However, the completely clutter-free static program looks much like a dynamic one! If I look at some snippet of OCaml or what have you, for all I know it could be dynamic.

The difference is that it's constrained in invisible ways. (If it is already correct in its current form) it cannot be changed in certain ways and still be accepted for execution.

That doesn't mean a thing to me when I'm just looking at it trying to understand it. I have to figure out what the types are, and connect all the pieces in my head.




In a statically-typed language with reasonable tools you can right-click on an expression and see what type it is. This whole thing you're describing is a non-issue.




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

Search: