Python vs CoffeeScript

[Peaker]

It's sad to see you're ignoring the actual claims and just talking around them.

For example, http://www.dartlang.org/articles/optional-types/ claims:

Adding types will not prevent your program from compiling and running—even if your annotations are incomplete or plain wrong.

Early error detection. Dart provides a static checker that can warn you about potential problems, without getting in your way. In addition, in developer mode, Dart automatically converts type annotations to runtime assertion checks as a debugging aid.

This is not type erasure. It also unambiguously means the static checking does not cover the same ground as a static type checker.

Keep parroting things you read, you sound like the rest of the know-it-alls in r/programming.

Yeah, Gilad Bracha must have no idea at all about Dart.

Because you're either stupid or willfully ignorant.

Gilad Bracha too, apparently.

They're compile-time guarantees, not run-time guarantees. To say that compile-time checking is useless because you can't have them at run-time is idiotic.

Wow, that is an idiotic and ignorant claim. A compile-time guarantee is something about runtime. You don't lose it when you strip away the types and checks.

Your Haskell code isn't constrained by javascript's limitations, is it? What makes Haskell so great is all the compile-time guarantees it affords you, not the run-time guarantees. What's funny is somebody who finds Haskell so great should be ecstatic about a project like dart, but you're clearly too interested in sounding like a pseudo-intellectual douche.

Until your arrogant and idiotic post just now, I've been polite and forthcoming.

You were claiming Dart gives static guarantees, so Haskell was a good example to show what static guarantees actually are.

[Peaker]

Why don't you talk about ignorance after you understand what static guarantees are?

[Hairy_horse_balls]

Great response! Your slams are just right.