|
| From: | Daniel Leslie |
| Subject: | Re: [Chicken-users] go routines for chicken |
| Date: | Thu, 28 Nov 2013 10:33:12 -0800 |
That lays the type safety burden upon the developer at run time and not the compiler.
Daniel Leslie <address@hidden> writes:
> Go also enjoys a rather robust Channels system, which is sort of like
> Scheme's ports, only it's type-safe by design.
How are Scheme ports not type-safe? The main difference is that Scheme
ports are limited to just a single type (i.e. characters) but that
doesn't make them type-unsafe, no? :-)
Moritz
| [Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |