Static types: Difference between revisions
From ym2149.org
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
* lightweight mocks redundant in the absence of static types, you can just use the test harness as a universal mock | * lightweight mocks redundant in the absence of static types, you can just use the test harness as a universal mock | ||
* a kind of gatekeeping or hazing, you can join the programming club so long as you keep burning energy typing things | * a kind of gatekeeping or hazing, you can join the programming club so long as you keep burning energy typing things | ||
* naughty developers will simply subvert type checking to force through their changes | |||
** from their point of view, why be mindful when types keep trying to do that for you | |||
[[Category:Programming]] | [[Category:Programming]] | ||
Latest revision as of 09:04, 9 May 2024
- weird that params and return types are obsessively typed, but not exceptions
- all their stated advantages can be achieved via unit testing, which you need anyway
- lightweight mocks redundant in the absence of static types, you can just use the test harness as a universal mock
- a kind of gatekeeping or hazing, you can join the programming club so long as you keep burning energy typing things
- naughty developers will simply subvert type checking to force through their changes
- from their point of view, why be mindful when types keep trying to do that for you
