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

I’ve worked in a lot of languages, from PHP 3 to Rust, F# and Typescript and a lot of others. So I’m relatively educated about their differences and pretty open minded about languages but I still don’t understand why there is still a debate about this.

I mean, I can understand that some language don’t implement types and that they have other advantages (Elixir is a nice example) but I still don’t understand why no typing is still seen by some people as an advantage.

What sort of code can you write in a non-typed langage that you couldn’t write with a typed one ? Newest type systems are mostly invisible and working by inference.

The greatest example is TypeScript : you can throw any untyped Javascript at the compiler and it will still infer the types allowing you to get great auto completion and to avoid logical bugs. Why would you prefer to not have this feature ?

For me, compile time checks aren’t even the real feature, I’d even say that they are useless because they come after the real features of typed languages which is your IDE proposing auto completion that is guaranteed to work. It’s an incredible way to discover the APIs when you know that something must exist but you don’t know how it’s named.

But I’m open to be proven wrong if someone can give me practical examples in which types are counterproductive.




If elixir had types, I'd use them. Right now I'm using it for functional programming aspects, coherent design across libraries, liveview, and the amazing OTP library. Those to me are much more important.

With proper discipline you can get a lot of type-like behavior if you use structs to represent your data and ensure they're being passed in function args through pattern matching.


it's waiting for you

{:type_check, "~> 0.13.3"}


Feels like it's still in flux/research phase




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

Search: