332
Why make it complicated?
(lemmy.ml)
Made with KolourPaint and screenshots from Kate (with the GitHub theme).
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 19 Jun 2025
332 points (90.7% liked)
Programmer Humor
25080 readers
900 users here now
Welcome to Programmer Humor!
This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!
For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.
Rules
- Keep content in english
- No advertisements
- Posts must be related to programming or programmer topics
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
You're encoding more information in the typescript one. You're saying it's a string that will get updated.
That looks like rust ngl
It's also valid rust syntax.
But if it were rust, this meme would not make sense, since you would just type
let aand type inference would do its thing. Which is much more ergonomic.let a = String::from(“Hello, world!”).into()I’ll see myself out.
At least be fair and cut out the
.into()And bow to the compiler’s whims? I think not!
This shouldn’t compile, because .into needs the type from the left side and let needs the type from the right side.
If type constraints later in the function let the compiler infer the type, this syntax totally works.
Like if the variable is then used in a function that only takes one type? Huh.