• tatterdemalion@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 months ago

    But now your requiring more tools and effort on the reviewer over, just reading the code.

    This should be completely negligible if you are writing code in the same code base.

    • sudo@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 months ago

      I was already assuming I was working on the same codebase. I am not going to stash my work, checkout the branch and wait for the LSP to start up (if it’s working) just to confirm that your types aren’t doing anything weird. I’d rather just have them annotated correctly in the first place and just read the PR and trust the CI.

      • tatterdemalion@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        You don’t need to restart your LSP to switch to a new branch. You also don’t need an LSP to find the types.

        Even with all of these issues aside, I can’t think of the last time I was reviewing a PR where it wasn’t clear from context what the types were, or they were irrelevant.

        • sudo@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 months ago

          wth is your position then? If I can know the types from just looking at the code then it must have adequate type annotations and none of this matters. If I can’t tell the types and I have to pull the code locally to figure it out then I’m not starting the review on a good foot.

          I think people here are thinking about type inference in a very local scope and not at a public function level which I understood the author to be complaining about.