DEV Community πŸ‘©β€πŸ’»πŸ‘¨β€πŸ’»

Vee Satayamas
Vee Satayamas

Posted on

Where static type checking and type annotation are shining

Many teams don't test their functions separately. They run the whole project to see the result. When something goes wrong, they check the log and use a debugger. They are the majority, at least from my experience. Static type checking and type annotations are efficient for these teams because type annotations give a rough idea about data for each function. They can't look at testing data, which doesn't exist.

Still, I wonder if forcing type annotation is practical. Reading a long function is difficult. By splitting a long function, I found that type annotation can be distracting because instead of focusing on logic, I have to think about type annotation; sometimes, the size of type annotation is about half the function's size. Maybe forcing type annotation only on functions, which an outsider from another module can call, like in OCaml, is practical. I haven't coded in OCaml beyond some toy programs. So I don't know if it is really practical as I imagine.

Top comments (0)

🌚 Friends don't let friends browse without dark mode.

Sorry, it's true.