undefined | Better HN

0 pointscoolsunglasses11y ago0 comments

I went to dependent types specifically because I figured we meant static avoidance without resorting to checked arithmetic. (better performance)

0 comments

dllthomas11y ago

Sure, that would be a good reason to go there. I didn't mean to cast aspersions at dependent types. I was just confused/amused at the typical case being cast as a hypothetical.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 pointscoolsunglasses11y ago0 comments

I went to dependent types specifically because I figured we meant static avoidance without resorting to checked arithmetic. (better performance)

0 comments

dllthomas11y ago

Sure, that would be a good reason to go there. I didn't mean to cast aspersions at dependent types. I was just confused/amused at the typical case being cast as a hypothetical.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse