Sure, it's definitely something worth taking into consideration, I just wouldn't value it too highly and in many cases I think there are much better indicators of ability.
In Rust you can solve this via derive or a macro. Typescript's conditional types and the associated utility types are a nice solution to this problem as well. You can do a ton with Partial, Required, Pick, Omit, Exclude…
How exactly are you going to implement a type safe option type without generics? You either have to use interface{}, which is obviously not type safe, or write/generate an option type for every type contained within it.…
> Is that not what generics would fix? No. That would be fixed by having something akin to typeclasses, traits or interfaces. Elm's List, Maybe and Array are all defined using a generic type parameter.
> Well, I just come from a Elm gig and I must say I was not too bothered with the lack of generics there. Elm has generics.
Sure, it's definitely something worth taking into consideration, I just wouldn't value it too highly and in many cases I think there are much better indicators of ability.
In Rust you can solve this via derive or a macro. Typescript's conditional types and the associated utility types are a nice solution to this problem as well. You can do a ton with Partial, Required, Pick, Omit, Exclude…
How exactly are you going to implement a type safe option type without generics? You either have to use interface{}, which is obviously not type safe, or write/generate an option type for every type contained within it.…
> Is that not what generics would fix? No. That would be fixed by having something akin to typeclasses, traits or interfaces. Elm's List, Maybe and Array are all defined using a generic type parameter.
> Well, I just come from a Elm gig and I must say I was not too bothered with the lack of generics there. Elm has generics.