JoelOnSoftware wrote an article I recently saw linked on perlmonks:
http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/Wrong.html
The article discusses writing robust software, specifically by
dealing with data separation.
In my interpretation the article introduces a type system. This type
system
Yuval Kogman skribis 2005-10-18 20:38 (+0200):
the function encode has the type Unsafe - Safe
I read the article before. What occurred to me then did so again now.
What exactly do Unsafe and Safe mean? Safe for *what*?
Something that is safe to put in HTML may be unsafe to put in an
On Tue, Oct 18, 2005 at 21:04:02 +0200, Juerd wrote:
Yuval Kogman skribis 2005-10-18 20:38 (+0200):
the function encode has the type Unsafe - Safe
I read the article before. What occurred to me then did so again now.
What exactly do Unsafe and Safe mean? Safe for *what*?
That was just
Yuval Kogman skribis 2005-10-18 21:22 (+0200):
I read the article before. What occurred to me then did so again now.
What exactly do Unsafe and Safe mean? Safe for *what*?
That was just a naive example - the words Unsafe and Safe are
user defined, and are chosen on a case by case basis in
[snip]
Let me rephrase to see if I understand you - you like the fact that
boxed types + roles applied to those types + compile-time type
checking/inference allows you to tag a piece of information (int,
char, string, obj, whatever) with arbitrary metadata. Add that to the
fact that you can
