Larry GarfieldSep 2, 2023
Show threadharryprayivSep 2, 2023
@Crell @vascorsd after spending three months fighting with Purescript and purs-nix, this image is more about Purescript, IMO. It’s insane the hoops you have to jump through to get any semblance of type safety from JS.
Show threadAlfonso Gómez-ArzolaSep 2, 2023
@harryprayiv @Crell @vascorsd That's because JavaScript is not a strongly typed language. Trying to get almost anything to behave like something other than what it is will be an uphill battle.
Show threadMagnus AhltorpSep 3, 2023
@agarzola @harryprayiv @Crell @vascorsd Whoever thinks the problem with Javascript is lack of static typing needs to study computer science for a couple of years and then come back.
Show threadAvenger

@ahltorp @agarzola @harryprayiv @Crell @vascorsd
I don't think the problem is about static typing, or the point being [to be statically typed].

I believe that it's actually about code structuring and compactness, to address the image in this post (as I keep the irony of this comment more in line with the original post). Which is part of the problems of languages that try to implement polymerization, i.e, perform a task in many ways, badly. Just one of the problems of it.

Sep 4, 2023 at 7:32pmWeb