11 ms·
Removing structural typing wouldn't be an improvement to my mind. It's the sort of thing you use maybe once a year, but when you do it's extremely useful to hav
by trailfox 13y ago
Removing structural typing wouldn't be an improvement to my mind. It's the sort of thing you use maybe once a year, but when you do it's extremely useful to have around. It's a bit like saying that removing the ternary conditional operator in Java would make a big difference to developers' lives.
- lmm 13y agoI think the kind of features you use maybe once a year are a bad thing to have in programming languages - ease of reading is more important than ease of writing.
- trailfox 13y agoI should also point out that it's a feature which I don't believe detracts from readability. It's pretty clear from looking at code which uses ST what it does. There are examples in this thread. It's a feature that you will use directly maybe once a year when adding it to a library, but I then use that library (and indirectly that feature) virtually every day. YMMV but we've found it very useful.