| ▲ | guenthert 2 hours ago | |
Why stop there? Why not demand proof of correctness? After all, that's now within reach using LLMs producing the formal specification from a simple prompt, right? SBCL does a fine job in detecting type mismatches within the frame of ANSI Common Lisp, not Haskell. While I would agree that a strict type system eases long term maintenance of large systems, for "explorative computing", proof-of-concepts, RAD or similar that tends to get in the way. And if such proof-of-concept looks promising, then there is no shame in rewriting it in a language more suitable for scale and maintenance. | ||