MasterNerd@lemm.ee to Programmer Humor@lemmy.ml · 15 days agoLabels go brrrrlemm.eeimagemessage-square12fedilinkarrow-up16arrow-down10cross-posted to: programmer_humor@programming.dev
arrow-up16arrow-down1imageLabels go brrrrlemm.eeMasterNerd@lemm.ee to Programmer Humor@lemmy.ml · 15 days agomessage-square12fedilinkcross-posted to: programmer_humor@programming.dev
minus-squareZephyrXero@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up0·15 days agoThis is just preferring runtime validation instead of compile time validation.
minus-squareEthan@programming.devlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up0·14 days agoAnd relying on runtime validation is a horrific way to write production code
minus-squaremanicdave@feddit.uklinkfedilinkarrow-up1·14 days agoWhy though? I’ve genuinely never had a problem with it. If something is wrong, it was always going to be wrong. Why is it preferable to have to write a bunch of bolierplate than just deal with the stacktrace when you do encounter a type error?
This is just preferring runtime validation instead of compile time validation.
And relying on runtime validation is a horrific way to write production code
Why though? I’ve genuinely never had a problem with it. If something is wrong, it was always going to be wrong. Why is it preferable to have to write a bunch of bolierplate than just deal with the stacktrace when you do encounter a type error?