infernu
Hegel
Our great sponsors
infernu | Hegel | |
---|---|---|
2 | 15 | |
337 | 2,109 | |
- | - | |
0.0 | 0.0 | |
over 5 years ago | 3 months ago | |
Haskell | JavaScript | |
GNU General Public License v2.0 only | MIT License |
Stars - the number of stars that a project has on GitHub. Growth - month over month growth in stars.
Activity is a relative number indicating how actively a project is being developed. Recent commits have higher weight than older ones.
For example, an activity of 9.0 indicates that a project is amongst the top 10% of the most actively developed projects that we are tracking.
infernu
-
The TypeScript Experience
Or maybe a sound type system can only be achieved either by limiting JavaScript or with a different language that compiles to JavaScript?
-
Features of a dream programming language: 2nd draft.
Very constrained. Since "constraints liberate, liberties constrain", as Bjarnason said. Inspired by Golang's minimalism, and Elm's guardrails. For learnability and maintainability. Since discipline doesn't scale (obligatory xkcd: with too much power, and the wrong nudges, all it takes is a moment of laziness/crunch-time to corrupt a strong foundation), and a complex language affords nerd-sniping kinds of puzzles, and bikeshedding and idiomatic analysis-paralysis. Counter-inspired by Haskell. The virtue of functional programming is that it subtracts features that are too-powerful/footguns (compared to OOP), namely: mutation & side-effects. The language designers should take care of and standardize all the idiomacy (natural modes of expression in the language). "Inside every big ugly language there is a small beautiful language trying to come out." -- sinelaw. The language should assume the developer is an unexperienced, lazy, (immediately) forgetful, and habitual creature. As long as software development is done by mere humans. This assumption sets the bar (the worst case), and is a good principle for DX, as well as UX. The constrained nature of the language should allow for quick learning and proficiency. Complexity should lie in the system and domain, not the language. When the language restricts what can be done, it's easier to understand what was done (a smaller space of possibilities reduces ambiguity and increases predictability, which gives speed for everyone, at a small initial learning cost). The language should avoid Pit of Despair programming, and leave the programmer in the Pit of Success: where its rules encourage you to write correct code in the first place. Inspired by Eric Lippert, but also by Rust.
Hegel
- Ask HN: Are “normal” vocabulary getting depleted by tech-brand hijacking?
-
Hegel – An advanced static type checker for JavaScript
unfortunately, the project is on pause for the time being [1]
[1]: https://github.com/JSMonk/hegel/issues/355#issuecomment-1075...
-
Ezno
Thank you. Just checked out the Bagel post (https://www.brandons.me/blog/the-bagel-language) and it looks really cool. Identifying pure functions (whether that is by syntax annotation or from synthesis) is a really good idea, gives me some ideas for doing function inlining in Ezno. I like the "Misc niceties" section, a few of those may of may not be on Ezno's todo list :)
The automatic / inferred generic restrictions is quite cool. https://hegel.js.org/ got there before me! Basic restriction modification is quite simple e.g. `(x) => Math.sin(x)`, x wants to be a number so can add that restriction. It gets more difficult with higher poly types. `(someObj) => Math.sin(someObj.prop1.prop2)` requires modifying not just `someObj` but a property on a property on it. And `(x, y) => printString(x + y)` requires doing even more complex things. But its definitely possible!
- Hegel: advanced static type checker for JavaScript
-
The TypeScript Experience
Can TypeScript be improved in this respect? Or, in broader terms, can a superset of JavaScript support a sound type system without becoming overly complicated?
-
Differences between TypeScript and Elm
An alternative to TypeScript can be Flow, a library maintained by Facebook. Flow, similarly to TypeScript, is not a sound type system. "Flow tries to be as sound and complete as possible. But because JavaScript was not designed around a type system, Flow sometimes has to make a tradeoff". Another alternative is Hegel, a type system that "attempts" to be sound. It is unclear to me if the attempt succeeded or not but it is worth checking.
-
An introduction to type programming in TypeScript – zhenghao
Check out Hegel[0], it uses Flow syntax, it's compatible w/ .d.ts type definitions and has a smarter type inference model than both TS and Flow IMHO.
[0] https://hegel.js.org/
- Hegel: a type checker for JavaScript with optional type annotations for preventing runtime type errors
What are some alternatives?
ascii-art-to-unicode - Small program to convert ASCII box art to Unicode box drawings.
TypeScript - IO wrapper around TypeScript language services, allowing for easy consumption by editor plugins
ekg-carbon - An EKG backend to send statistics to Carbon (part of Graphite monitoring tools)
Hindley Milner Definitions - Runtime type checking for JS with Hindley Milner signatures
argon2 - Haskell bindings to libargon2 - the reference implementation of the Argon2 password-hashing function
TypL - The Type Linter for JS
gotta-go-fast - A command line utility for practicing typing and measuring your WPM and accuracy.
io-ts - Runtime type system for IO decoding/encoding
hascard - flashcard TUI with markdown cards
ramda - :ram: Practical functional Javascript
quokka - Repository for Quokka.js questions and issues
purescript - A strongly-typed language that compiles to JavaScript