There's a link to his presentation there actually: http://www.infoq.com/presentations/data-types-issues?utm_source=infoq&utm_medium=QCon_EarlyAccessVideos&utm_campaign=StrangeLoop2013
However is says this: *Thank you for attending Strange Loop 2013* This is a restricted presentation that can only be viewed by Strange Loop 2013 attendees! Maybe Alex can comment on whether it's possible for those who didn't attend to watch this video at all. I'd be very keen. Leonardo Borges www.leonardoborges.com On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 2:11 AM, gaz jones <gareth.e.jo...@gmail.com> wrote: > Martin Odersky gave a keynote at Strangeloop this year called "The Trouble > With Types" (https://thestrangeloop.com/sessions/the-trouble-with-types) > which made me never want to use a type system again (probably the exact > opposite of his intention). The video should be coming out on infoq at some > point: (http://www.infoq.com/conferences/strangeloop2013/). I've never > looked at Scala before and I'm pretty sure I never will after sitting > through that... > > > On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 9:26 AM, juan.facorro <juan.faco...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> Thanks for the link! I really liked the interview, it was interesting and >> fun to watch. >> >> J >> >> On Monday, October 7, 2013 9:49:24 AM UTC+9, brad bowman wrote: >>> >>> > zcaudate <z...@caudate.me> Oct 05 08:35PM -0700 >>> > I'm a little bit miffed over this current craze of `types` and >>> > `correctness` of programs. It smells to me of the whole `object` craze >>> of >>> > the last two decades. I agree that types (like objects) have their >>> uses, >>> > especially in very well defined problems, but they have got me in >>> trouble >>> > over and over again when I am working in an area where the goal is >>> unclear >>> > and requirements are constantly changing. >>> >>> Joe Armstrong and Simon Peyton Jones discuss Erlang and Haskell >>> http://www.infoq.com/**interviews/armstrong-peyton-** >>> jones-erlang-haskell<http://www.infoq.com/interviews/armstrong-peyton-jones-erlang-haskell> >>> >>> This interview covers some of the strong-types vs flexible development >>> (apparent) dichotomy, but in a playful, open and non-dogmatic way. >>> (catmatic?) >>> >>> Simon Peyton Jones is one of the Haskell leaders, yet admits to >>> being envious of type-free generics. Joe Armstrong of Erlang fame >>> also sees the benefit to thinking in and annotating types. >>> These two are both leaders of typed or dynamic cults but have >>> a pleasant friendly and frank conversation about the issues. >>> (Erlang's Dialyzer sounds somewhat like core.typed) >>> >>> A sample: >>> >>> SPJ: So, I've told you what I most envy about Erlang. What do you most >>> envy >>> about Haskell? >>> >>> JA: All the types. I mean they're very nice. I wish we had them. On the >>> other >>> hand, wouldn't you love to have all these generic turn-to-binary, these >>> sort >>> of things? How can you live without them? >>> >>> SPJ: I have a little bit of residual envy about generics. >>> >>> JA: You just take anything and compare it to the serializer and then >>> send it? >>> >>> SPJ: That's sinfully easy, and shouldn't be allowed. >>> >>> >>> So if these two can agree that there's strengths and weaknesses in both >>> approaches, that settles it for me. It's a matter of knowing your >>> trade-offs and choosing your tools appropriately. >>> >>> My suspicion is that type affinity is related to some trait of >>> personality, >>> and so trying to "prove" superiority is a likely to work as "proving" >>> you >>> are right in any other clash of personalities. >>> >>> Brad >>> >>> -- >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> Groups "Clojure" group. >> To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com >> Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with >> your first post. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en >> --- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Clojure" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >> > > -- > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "Clojure" group. > To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com > Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with > your first post. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Clojure" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > -- -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
