logoalt Hacker News

miki123211today at 3:31 AM2 repliesview on HN

This isn't specific to Rust or Typescript. You can do this in basically any language.

Imagine you have to distinguish between unescaped and escaped strings for security purposes. Even with a dynamically typed language, you can keep escaped strings as an Escaped class, with escape(str)->Escaped and dangerouslyAssumeEscaped(str)->Escaped functions (or static methods). There's a performance cost to this, so that's a tradeoff you have to weigh, but it is possible.

Another way of doing this is Application Hungarian[1], though that relies on the programmer more than it does on the compiler.

[1] https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2005/05/11/making-wrong-code-...


Replies

dasyatidprimetoday at 4:56 AM

> There's a performance cost to this

That part is (de facto) required for dynamically typed languages, but not for statically typed ones where the newtype constructor/deconstructor can be elided at compile time. Rust and C++ especially both do the latter by having true value types available for wrappers that evaporate into zero extra machine code.

But then just this moment I wondered: do any major runtimes using models with no static type info manage to do full newtype elision in the JIT and only box on the deopt path? What about for models with some static type info but no value types, like Java? (Java's model would imply trickiness around mutability, but it might be possible to detect the easy cases still.) I don't remember any, but it could've shown up when I wasn't looking.

show 1 reply
wyagertoday at 4:25 AM

> You can do this in basically any language.

You can do it in Assembly. That doesn't mean it's cost effective.

show 2 replies