Hi there! There is an 'optional type system' for Clojure in 'core.typed':
https://github.com/clojure/core.typed But it also seems like others who were using such a type system have stepped away from it: https://circleci.com/blog/why-were-no-longer-using-core-typed/ On 10/15/2016 03:14 PM, Didier wrote: > I know a lot of people like to say how unhelpful Java like static > typing is, and only more powerful type systems of the ML family add > value, but I've been wondering recently if for Clojure it wouldn't > make more sense to simply extend the type hints to enable an optional > Java like static typing scheme. > > It is my understanding that ML style static typing is incredibly > difficult to add properly and without compromise to a dynamic > language. That doing so limits the scope of type inference, rendering > the task of adding type info more tedious then in ML languages themselves. > > ML style static typing provide enhanced safety grantees, but seem to > add too much complexity to Clojure to be practical. What about a Java > like static typing scheme though? > > I haven't found in practice that the safety of Clojure was an issue, > as the REPL workflow tend to promote quite a lot of testing. So I'm > not too worried about needing the state of the art of provable > correctness for my programs. What has been a biggest cause of issue to > me was refactoring and shared code base across a team. Those last two > use cases are actually pretty well handled by Java like static type > checking. Is it a powerful type checker, not really, but it enables > most trivial type errors to be caught early, and it allows easier > integration points for other devs to follow, as well as documentation > for functions, better tools support and easier refactoring, while also > enabling performance optimizations. > > I have limited knowledge in typing systems, and have no idea how easy > it is to implement them, but as a user of Clojure, I feel like I would > find an optional Java like static typing a great addition, one that I > am more willing to use and benefit from then Typed Clojure's more > complex ML style type checking. > > What do other think? > Can anyone with better knowledge tell me if this would be feasible or > if adding such gradual typing system is effectively as hard as adding > ML style type checking? > -- > 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 > <mailto:clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com>. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- 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/d/optout.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
