undefined | Better HN

0 pointsseanmcdirmid12y ago0 comments

The computer is a tool I use to help me solve problems. Part of the process of solving problems, for me at least, is to write code that executes, and spend some time in the debugger to see if my assumptions were right. The computer is a tool for solving problems, dammit! It is ridiculous to think that you should solve the problem using pencil and paper (b/c computers no good for problem solving!?!), with various mathematical proofs (b/c we can and should prove everything?!?) and the computer is just an annoying end point for getting solutions out.

Programming is not just about implementing solutions, but also about finding solutions.

0 comments

3 comments · 2 top-level

nightski12y ago· 1 in thread

I actually agree with you. My point was that types are a much better tool than hacking code and debugging. Once the types are embraced and used as a tool, instead of thought of as a straitjacket that is where the real power lies.

seanmcdirmidOP12y ago

Types, especially with some good inference, don't necessarily get in the way of exploration, but purity most certainly does. Not being able to take shortcuts and being expected to have a pre-well elegant understanding of your problem can be a big blocker.

But types are fairly conservative, dynamic languages still provide quicker turn around times even if semantic feedback can't be provided. One of my research projects is focusing on getting the benefits of both.

marshray12y ago

Some people like to think in terms of 'proofs', it seems reasonable to me that they would think of a compiler as a tool for 'solving problems' in those terms. But most of us seem to be more empirical.

Interestingly the best reverse engineers I've ever met, who are total descriptivists with a debugger, are also some of the most pedantic prescriptivists when it comes to writing actual code. It comes full circle, I think because they understand the reasoning behind the API contracts better than the API documentation tells.