/prog/ - Static typing is security theater for programmers

Name: Anonymous 2014-06-25 16:01

http://blog.metaobject.com/2014/06/the-safyness-of-static-typing.html
Face it, Haskelitists: There are not a lot of bugs that can be caught by a type system. Such it up and use texting like the rest of us.

Name: Anonymous 2014-06-27 13:56

>>40
Prove that your definition of addition is consistent with my definition of addition.

Name: Anonymous 2014-06-27 14:00

>>40
Yeah, I think you're being trolled.

Name: Anonymous 2014-06-27 17:12

>>41
Provide us with your definition of addition.

Name: Anonymous 2014-06-27 17:45

It's a known fact that relativists/subjectivists always score lower on IQ test than everybody else.

Name: Anonymous 2014-06-27 22:01

It's a known fact that DIE IN A FIRE I FUCKING HATE YOU LE CRETIN DON'T MOCK ME SDSAKFHSKDJFHKDSJFHAKSDHFAKSHDFKJADSHF FUCK YOU *cocks shotgun*

Name: Anonymous 2014-06-28 4:02

>>45
KEINE THE COW

Name: Anonymous 2014-06-28 4:58

Programs are proofs, but only typed programs are useful proofs and only with regard to that which is expressed in types.

Tested programs can also be useful proofs, but testers aim for code coverage instead of spec and assumption coverage for some weird reason so they rarely ever prove anything useful.

Name: Anonymous 2014-06-28 6:17

>>47
Programs are programs, not proofs. Stop fucking doing this stupid shit. Next thing you're gonna say is that a computer is a homosexual nigger (you).

Name: Anonymous 2014-06-28 7:13

>>36
It's possible to keep it decidable, the only downside is requiring the programmer to declare types explicitly everywhere, which is a small price to pay for increased correctness guarantees.

Name: Anonymous 2014-06-28 7:49

>>48
You might not like the Curry-Howard correspondence, but it still exists.

It doesn't have anything to say anything about the GNAA, so I think maybe you have some things you need to work out.

Name: Anonymous 2014-06-28 10:48

>>46
DON'T MOCK KEINE SAFIKHDSFKLDJHADSJKLFHASDKJFHKASHFAJKDSFKDSA I FUCKING HATE YOU CRETIN DIE IN A FIRE

Name: Anonymous 2014-06-28 10:51

>>50
And it's still useless. What proofs are strcpy and memcpy equivalent to?

Name: Anonymous 2014-06-28 20:32

>>52
They're not well typed programs. But CompCert might have something to say about it: http://compcert.inria.fr/

Static typing is security theater for programmers

1 Name: Anonymous 2014-06-25 16:01

41 Name: Anonymous 2014-06-27 13:56

42 Name: Anonymous 2014-06-27 14:00

43 Name: Anonymous 2014-06-27 17:12

44 Name: Anonymous 2014-06-27 17:45

45 Name: Anonymous 2014-06-27 22:01

46 Name: Anonymous 2014-06-28 4:02

47 Name: Anonymous 2014-06-28 4:58

48 Name: Anonymous 2014-06-28 6:17

49 Name: Anonymous 2014-06-28 7:13

50 Name: Anonymous 2014-06-28 7:49

51 Name: Anonymous 2014-06-28 10:48

52 Name: Anonymous 2014-06-28 10:51

53 Name: Anonymous 2014-06-28 20:32