• andrew
      link
      fedilink
      English
      249 months ago

      Wait till you hear what strings are under the hood. Integers in a trench coat!

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      9
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      I think the article makes a good point, but perhaps I’m over-interpreting. It’s not that we should stop using strings. It’s that we should use the type system to separate different kinds of strings and enlist the compiler’s help to detect incorrect mingling of them. So for example a symbol type would only permit strings that contain ASCII letters, underscore and digits, and concatenation with / conversion to plain strings would be limited.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      39 months ago

      It’s definitely a rule that can be taken so far that it is counterproductive, but I think it’s good practice to thbk about how I could use something other than a raw string ( even if it’s just a constant defined somewhere )

      • Kogasa
        link
        fedilink
        29 months ago

        The analytic continuation of KB(x) to the complex plane subject to a superconvexivity constraint is unique but doesn’t necessarily have a straightforward geometric interpretation

    • corytheboyd
      link
      fedilink
      1
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      You joke, but Rails actually does make Integer do too many things lol. I’d argue they’re useful things, but it does so by patching the core Ruby Integer class :p