Yeah, let's pretend that type algebra doesn't exist, and even if it does exist then it's not useful and definitely isn't practical in data protocols. Let's believe that the authors of protobuf considered everything, and since they aren't amateurs (by the virtue of having worked on protobuf at Google, presumably), every elaborated opinion that draws them as amateurs at applying type algebra in data protocol designs is a personal ad-hominem attack.

▲

tptacek 6 days ago | parent [-]

They're not amateurs by virtue of being some of the most senior engineers ever to work at Google. You don't get to play the "ad hominem" card while calling them names. This whole thread is embarrassing.

▲

instig007 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

Ok, "some of the most senior engineers ever to work at Google" don't seem to know that static bounds checking don't require dependent types: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45150008

> You don't get to play the "ad hominem" card while calling them names

The entire article explains it at length why there's the impression, it's not ad-hominem.

	▲	tptacek 4 days ago \| parent [-]
		Previous threads on this story have spelled out specifically which Googlers were behind this design, and, again, it's embarrassing that anybody is trying to defend the hill of "protobuf's designers were amateurs". You can keep digging in if you want.

▲

b_e_n_t_o_n 6 days ago | parent | prev [-]

[flagged]