What are obnoxious types? Types either represent the data correctly or not. I think you can force types to shut up the compiler in any language including Haskell, Idris, PureScript...
I'd say you already get like 70% of the benefit of a type system with just the basic "you can't pass an int where string is expected". Being able to define your own types based on the basic ones, like "type Email string", so it's no longer possible to pass a "string" where "Email" is expected gets you to 80%. Add Result and Optional types (or arguably just sum types if you prefer) and you're at 95%. Anything more and you're pushing into diminishing returns.
Well it depends what you're doing. 95% is like, just your opinion man. The rust type system allows, in many cases, APIs that you cannot use wrongly, or are highly resistant to incorrect usage, but to do that requires careful thinking about. To be clear, such APIs are just as relevant internally to a project as externally if you want to design a system that is long term maintainable and robust and I would argue is the point when the type system starts to get really useful (rather than diminishing returns).
> The rust type system allows, in many cases, APIs that you cannot use wrongly, or are highly resistant to incorrect usage, but to do that requires careful thinking about
I need none of that guarantee and all of the compilation speed along with a language where juniors in my team can contribute quickly. Different problem space.
This might work for the types you create, but what about all the code written in the language that expects the “proper” structure?
> Types either represent the data or not
This definitely required, but is only really the first step. Where types get really useful is when you need to change them later on. The key aspects here are how easily you can change them, and how much the language tooling can help.
That's not true. There's a spectrum of typing complexity all the way from TCL everything-is-a-string to formal languages like Lean where the types can prove all sorts of things.
As you go further towards formal verification you get:
* More accurate / tighter types. For example instead of `u8` you might have `range(0, 7)` or even a type representing all odd numbers.
* Better compile time detection of bugs. (Ultimately you are formally verifying the program.)
* Worse type errors. Eventually you're getting errors that are pretty much "couldn't prove the types are correct; try again".
* More difficulty satisfying the type checker. There's a reason formal verification of software isn't very popular.
So it's definitely true that "more obnoxious types" exist, but Go is very far from the obnoxious region. Even something like Rust is basically fine. I think you can even go a little into dependent types before they really start getting obnoxious.
TL;DR, he's just lazy and doesn't really care about bugs.
> Types either represent the data correctly or not.
No. two types can represent the same payload, but one might be a simple structure, the other one could be three or twenty nested type template abstractions deep, and created by a proc macro so you can't chase down how it was made so easily.
Yeah. I am a backend dev these days because it pays more.
Backend people have this obnoxious attitude of looking down on frontend without having any idea what it entails.
Also demonising V8 and glorifying the JVM for some reason. In my experience frontend challenges around animation for example require a lot more reasoning than most backend tasks.
We have! Several times, in fact. You might recognize those changes by the names Rust, Zig, etc.
But for those who can't, for whatever reason, update their code to work with the substantial language changes, they are interested to see if there is also a solution that otherwise fits into what they've already got in a backwards-compatible way.
Japanese media is quite popular, and many fans want to watch/read their favourite thing in its original language. This is probably the reason most people learn a language, and a huge reason why so many kids around the world speak English. Chinese culture doesn't have the same impact, yet. As to Spanish, most kids who want to learn Spanish can do so at school so there is no need to go above and beyond to learn Spanish on your own.
> Chinese culture doesn't have the same impact, yet.
At this rate if 2/3rds of their popular media(manhua, games, animation) continues being cultivation fantasy featuring the exact same power system, tropes, character archetypes, often even setting(murim) and content, it never will.
Animanga were always poised to make it big, because for all their shortcomings, they have interesting, exotic(to us) themes/tropes/vibes, and go really hard on hyping scenes up.
You learn Japanese for the media and culture; Mandarin for the financial opportunities; Russian for the reverse-engineering community; Spanish, French or Arabic to be able to speak with large diverse groups of people, typically for travel; Klingon, Na'vi, Esperanto or Elvish to fit in certain communities
Accordingly, the stereotypical CS major is attracted to Japanese and Klingon, the stereotypical Business major to Chinese. Even though few follow through because of the amount of work and perseverance required
1. Generally people using such systems to learn language only need to do so if they aren't immersed in the country where it is being spoken. I stopped using Anki for German after a while of living here, even though I'm still learning. Therefore, most language learners are doing so not because they want to live in the country but because they want to consume media written in that language
2. Japanese is becoming one of the most popular languages for foreign media, probably even surpassing English at this point. Anime is really huge now, particularly in the US. It has shifted from being a nerd thing to being of interest for the "cool kids" (if there is even such a thing now). Japan also had a huge and very interesting media industry in the 80s and 90s including some very novel video game concepts, most of which has not been translated
For me, it's about the media. I'm interested in Japanese anime and manga, and now light novels.
I'm not at all interested in anything I've seen in other non-English languages, except possibly Korean now, since they seem to be producing a lot of stuff.
However, almost everything that I'd enjoy gets translated to English for both Japanese and Korean now, so there's a lot less incentive to learn them.
I'd say it's confirmation bias. In my personal circle, not a lot of people are interested in the Japanese language, but I know a few who took at least a few lessons on Mandarin or Spanish.
I've learned Japanese and part of the reason is that I thought kanji were attractive. I remember watching anime on TV when I was a kid and seeing the opening credits with Japanese characters looked soo cool.
When I was a kid, most of the foreign culture I was exposed from came from the US, and then Japan followed with a small amount.
No wonder my second language was English and third language Japanese.
Never heard a single word of Mandarin in any media I was exposed to. I can understand Spanish very well but I do not count it as a learned language as it is too close to Portuguese (my first language).
He actually learned German well enough to have appreciative audiences in Germany, but he also knows how to make amazing comedic essays on many topics. He did plenty about US-specific topics, and about French too, not just about German.
Which gives us Hitler memes where they audibly says German words that are very similar to their English counterparts, but the /funny/ subtitles is just a Beavis and Butthead level joke.
reply