Do you have any measurable (preferably peer-reviewed) evidence that suggests imperative programming is inherently easier? That sounds like a challenging claim to make.
I do think Python is an acceptable language for beginners, but I wouldn't say it has little magic. It may feel intuitive at times, but Python's magic methods can be somewhat disorienting for students. This usually hits…
> For example, Elm, a language largely inspired by Haskell, doesn't have partial functions. I may be wrong, but I don't think this is technically true. I don't think Elm has only total functions, but it does avoid a lot…
I don't know if i could offer a "path", but here are a few ideas to try out: 1. Start using hypothesis or jsverify. 2. Play around with Elm. 3. Participate in a community that highly values types. ## Properties vs Types…
Ah. Thank you for the links. Also, thanks for hypothesis.
> This sounds like C# as written by people that don't really know or like C#. If you're stuffing everything into strings or a dynamic, you missed the point of the type system in a very serious way. I agree, but I think…
Do you have any measurable (preferably peer-reviewed) evidence that suggests imperative programming is inherently easier? That sounds like a challenging claim to make.
I do think Python is an acceptable language for beginners, but I wouldn't say it has little magic. It may feel intuitive at times, but Python's magic methods can be somewhat disorienting for students. This usually hits…
> For example, Elm, a language largely inspired by Haskell, doesn't have partial functions. I may be wrong, but I don't think this is technically true. I don't think Elm has only total functions, but it does avoid a lot…
I don't know if i could offer a "path", but here are a few ideas to try out: 1. Start using hypothesis or jsverify. 2. Play around with Elm. 3. Participate in a community that highly values types. ## Properties vs Types…
Ah. Thank you for the links. Also, thanks for hypothesis.
> This sounds like C# as written by people that don't really know or like C#. If you're stuffing everything into strings or a dynamic, you missed the point of the type system in a very serious way. I agree, but I think…