| ▲ | scotty79 8 hours ago | |
Yeah, you are right that ease of drilling down values through the layers is balanced by the need to remember which places actually do something with the value. While I always liked dynamic languages and probably wrote most of my code in them I don't think they are useful anymore. Tooling got great and LLMs need every chance they get of verifying stuff they hallucinated. At this point I wouldn't mind a language that's strict about typing but other things as well as ownership, protocols, mandatory assertions, tests, code coverage, even some formal verification. As long as I don't have to write them, but LLM does and uses them to check its work, I'm really fond of it. | ||