let's talk about qi

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qi_(programming_language)

Copy pasted example of defining a type for a sorted list.

(12+) (datatype ordering

if (number? X)
if (number? Y)
let Z (* X 2)
if (= Y Z)
__________________
[X Y] : ordering;)
ordering : unit

(13+) [2 3] : ordering
error: type failure

(14+) [2 4] : ordering
[2 4] : ordering

>>40
Yes, he's a very shy kid. He tells us about his struggles and frustrations like that sometimes. Also about his favorite memes. Just go easy on him.

>>41
Well, I didn't mean to insult, or anything. We all have our daily struggles. I mean, mental ones, too. He'll figure stuff out, sooner or later.

>>41,42
Why are you talking to yourself?

>>40

who are you quoting

epic 4chan jp

>>44
Not as epic as >>39-kun's meme post, though. Keep trying.

epic means bad, right?

>>29
A programmer that makes a mistake when writing code can also make a mistake when writing a type declaration. It's a useful safety tool but it wont, and currently does not come close to, catching all mistakes.

>>47
It does come close. Catches the majority of human mistakes. And an erroneous type declaration will also probably be caught by type inference.

>>48
Bullshit, most of the mistakes I ever make are logic based, fancy type systems don't do shit other than catch retarded fuck ups.

>>49
Retarded fuck ups comprise the majority of human mistakes. Nobody cares about your individual case.

>>49
The purpose of a type system isn't to catch all your mistakes automatically. It's to allow you to define up-front what a certain kind of mistake in your logic is. At the basic level the standard library does a little bit of this for you, but you have to write your own types to extend that to the logic of your own program.

You can make mistakes while defining the types but the types are only a small part of the logic, and easier to get right. Doing this will allow the compiler to check important parts of the rest of your logic.

>>50
You are too attached to this one benefit of type safety to see the point. If you don't write your own types and put thought into them, the logic you write is no more likely to be correct than if you wrote it in JavaScript with a linter.

>>50

Nobody cares about your individual case.

Of course people care. See any disaster caused by a logical error in software.

>>51

The purpose of a type system isn't to catch all your mistakes automatically.

These aren't worth much.

You can make mistakes while defining the types but the types are only a small part of the logic, and easier to get right. Doing this will allow the compiler to check important parts of the rest of your logic.

The types you are talking about have no logic to them at all. They're just names and maybe they have a partial order of subtypes.

>>52
Mission-critical my anus

get this shit off my /prog/, retards

>>54
no u

>>52

The types you are talking about have no logic to them at all.

false.

You don't even get the joke.

>>56
The joke is you.

>>57
Good one.

>>57
The winrar is me.

>>59
Funny, cause you seem more like a stuffit.

i wonder how many daredevels out there facesit the following: Jesus, the Torah, the 10 Commandments, Josef Stalin, Adolf Hitler (if you can find any of his remains, good luck), Satan, your favorit hindoo goddess, and Chac Mool (that would be a Maya god).

Qi is good for domain-specific solutions, but it doesn't adequately address the issue of multiple inheritance out of the box.

>>62

inheritance

No thank you.

www.lambdassociates.org

msxml3.dll error '80072efd'
A connection with the server could not be established
/index.asp, line 39

lol

>>66
checked

□ I am a faggot.

>>66
I laughed

I chortled.