HiddenLayer555@lemmy.ml to Programmer Humor@programming.devEnglish · edit-213 days agoWhy make it complicated?lemmy.mlimagemessage-square107fedilinkarrow-up11arrow-down10file-textcross-posted to: [email protected]
arrow-up11arrow-down1imageWhy make it complicated?lemmy.mlHiddenLayer555@lemmy.ml to Programmer Humor@programming.devEnglish · edit-213 days agomessage-square107fedilinkfile-textcross-posted to: [email protected]
minus-squarecalcopiritus@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up0·13 days agoIt’s also valid rust syntax. But if it were rust, this meme would not make sense, since you would just type let a and type inference would do its thing. Which is much more ergonomic.
minus-squarenebeker@programming.devlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up0·13 days agolet a = String::from(“Hello, world!”).into() I’ll see myself out.
minus-squareanton@lemmy.blahaj.zonelinkfedilinkarrow-up0·12 days agoAt least be fair and cut out the .into()
minus-squarenebeker@programming.devlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up0·12 days agoAnd bow to the compiler’s whims? I think not! This shouldn’t compile, because .into needs the type from the left side and let needs the type from the right side.
minus-squareHaradion@lemmy.mllinkfedilinkarrow-up0·6 days agoIf type constraints later in the function let the compiler infer the type, this syntax totally works.
minus-squareVictor@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up0·13 days agoType inference is a pretty big thing in TypeScript as well though. In fact it’s probably the biggest thing about it, IMO.
minus-squarecalcopiritus@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up0·13 days agoI don’t know typescript. But if that’s the case, this meme doesn’t make much sense. Who writes the types of variables in a language with type inference unless forced by the compiler?
It’s also valid rust syntax.
But if it were rust, this meme would not make sense, since you would just type
let aand type inference would do its thing. Which is much more ergonomic.let a = String::from(“Hello, world!”).into()I’ll see myself out.
At least be fair and cut out the
.into()And bow to the compiler’s whims? I think not!
This shouldn’t compile, because .into needs the type from the left side and let needs the type from the right side.
If type constraints later in the function let the compiler infer the type, this syntax totally works.
Type inference is a pretty big thing in TypeScript as well though. In fact it’s probably the biggest thing about it, IMO.
I don’t know typescript. But if that’s the case, this meme doesn’t make much sense.
Who writes the types of variables in a language with type inference unless forced by the compiler?