YawarRaza7349

Three years ago, @hwayne posted A Totally Polished and not-at-all half-baked Take on Static vs Dynamic Typing to his email newsletter. When I first read it, I found it refreshing to read a more balanced programming-related post than I typically encounter, and I also learned some new ideas I'd never heard about before. However, this Gist is not really about all that; it's about one specific statement in the post that is incorrect. The error doesn't affect any of the arguments being made, nor am I criticizing Wayne for the error. Rather, correcting the statement allows me to explain some pretty interesting concepts that might be insightful to some people who read this.

---

Here is the statement I'll be talking about, along with the context of the statement:

Maybe a -> a is a subtype of a -> Maybe a: anything that typechecks with the latter should typecheck with the former.²

[...] >

YawarRaza7349

The only reason you are able to call Function.prototype.snapshotFunction as Function.snapshotFunction is because Function is itself a function, as are Object, String, Number, and any other JavaScript "class". If you replaced Function with String, this would no longer work. You added a method to all functions and called it on the function instance Function. So if you tried using this, it would reference the built-in Function function. So yes, this should either be a free-standing function, or, if you wanted to make it a method (e.g. getPrimitive.snapshot(["testPrimitive", testPrimitive])), then remove the first parameter of the function, and replace all references to it in the function with this. Speaking of this, I can't think of all the use cases for your function involving this, but with code like this, it's pretty likely this will cause something to break. I found an example here.

IMO, the [string, value, string, value, ...] thing is bad API de