After a bit of digging, it appears that dependent types, at least the Liquid Haskell kind, could catch it, but could also miss it. If you've constrained everything very tightly, it would catch it, if not, it could miss it.
In this regard, generative testing could still end up being practically more useful. Another thing is that dependent types (the Liquid Haskell kind), would also catch potential false positive. I'll mention Spectrum for clojure.spec again, because it is essentially a dependently typed static type checker for Clojure. It suffers from not everything being specced in Clojure, but you'll find it can still catch quite a lot, including the division by zero error I've described. It is still in early stages, and doesn't work with all Clojure code bases, but I'd keep an eye open for it. Reference: http://goto.ucsd.edu/~ucsdpl-blog/liquidtypes/2015/09/19/liquid-types/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
