undefined | Better HN

0 pointshencq9y ago0 comments

There's Typed Racket [1] and for Clojure there's core.typed [2]which do pretty much that. For Clojure there's also Schema [3], which is a bit lighter weight (it's not a full type system), but still gets you some of the benefits like validation and documentation.

[1] https://docs.racket-lang.org/ts-guide/ [2] https://github.com/clojure/core.typed [3] https://github.com/plumatic/schema

0 comments

hkjgkjy9y ago

Neither fit the bill though - because not every function ever written in the language is annotated. To be nice to use, it should be an all-or-nothing affair.

I say this as a huge clojure fan - my clojure programs with dynamic types work great. I rely on predicates (functions ending in -?) in I/O, otherwise I'm sure things work.

sgrove9y ago

Why is annotation important? I agree it needs to be possible, but ultimately I want to push the majority off into inference, and only explicitly annotate when necessary or formalizing interfaces OCaml-style.

Though I sure do wish I could have lisp (or clojure, specifically) syntax in OCaml-land.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse