@ted A language-killing mistake on their part IMO.
@freakazoid I think the part that makes it a critical failure is that nil satisfies every interface, where it should satisfy none. That way nil could only be used in extreme cases. Now it gets thrown around everywhere and will pop up when you least expect it.
@ted So now instead of the development speed of a dynamically typed language with the code quality of a static language, you get all the encumbrance of a type system with the runtime errors of a dynamically typed language. At least they finally added exceptions, but the legacy of not having them still mars the standard library, requiring manual checks in cases where even Python doesn't require them.
@ted It's almost like you need to actually learn something in order to get significant benefit from a type system.
@freakazoid I get the feeling they were more motivated by having a fast compiler than, you know, having useful features.
Now my premier example of premature optimization.
@ted It's almost like their basic premise that you can build a compiler that's so fast that you don't need a dynamically typed language was wrong or something.
@ted If only we weren't going to be dealing with the legacy of their failed experiment turned fad for the next decade.
The social network of the future: No ads, no corporate surveillance, ethical design, and decentralization! Own your data with Mastodon!