| ▲ | troupo 12 hours ago | |
They are working towards "the real thing", whatever your definition of real is. BTW in the 90s people tried to come up with a type system for Erlang, and failed: --- start quote --- Phil Wadler[1] and Simon Marlow [2] worked on a type system for over a year and the results were published in [3]. The results of the project were somewhat disappointing. To start with, only a subset of the language was type-checkable, the major omission being the lack of process types and of type checking inter-process mes-sages. Although their type system was never put into production, it did result in a notation for types which is still in use today for informally annotating types. Several other projects to type check Erlang also failed to produce results that could be put into production. It was not until the advent of the Dialyzer [4] that realistic type analysis of Erlang programs became possible. https://lfe.io/papers/%5B2007%5D%20Armstrong%20-%20HOPL%20II... --- end quote --- [1] Yes, that Philip Wadler, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philip_Wadler [2] Yes, that Simon Marlow, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon_Marlow [3] A practical subtyping system for Erlang https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/258948.258962 | ||