← Back to context Comment by Ericson2314 2 months ago Then I'm surprised you agreed with any of what I wrote! 1 comment Ericson2314 Reply jesse__ 2 months ago I mean, I agree with the notion that a great type system is part of a great language, but the type system is only a small part of the overall whole.Haskell has a great type system, but it fails miserably at many trivial tasks I care about :1) sum 1 million integers == stackoverflow (big lul)2) massive memory cliffs for using the wrong type [1], which is not uncommon3) poor metaprogramming facilities4) difficult documentation[1] https://stackoverflow.com/questions/76470000/is-there-a-reas...
jesse__ 2 months ago I mean, I agree with the notion that a great type system is part of a great language, but the type system is only a small part of the overall whole.Haskell has a great type system, but it fails miserably at many trivial tasks I care about :1) sum 1 million integers == stackoverflow (big lul)2) massive memory cliffs for using the wrong type [1], which is not uncommon3) poor metaprogramming facilities4) difficult documentation[1] https://stackoverflow.com/questions/76470000/is-there-a-reas...
I mean, I agree with the notion that a great type system is part of a great language, but the type system is only a small part of the overall whole.
Haskell has a great type system, but it fails miserably at many trivial tasks I care about :
1) sum 1 million integers == stackoverflow (big lul)
2) massive memory cliffs for using the wrong type [1], which is not uncommon
3) poor metaprogramming facilities
4) difficult documentation
[1] https://stackoverflow.com/questions/76470000/is-there-a-reas...