zlacker

>>tymsca+(OP)
I've looked at Gleam before but it didn't seem to have any mechanism for dynamic dispatch like interfaces or type classes. Did it change in the meantime?

>>mono44+gg
The answer I’ve seen is “just pass structs of functions around”, which is just one step more explicit than the implicit version we’re all use to, but honestly I kinda like it to free ourselves of all the ceremony around generics.

>>stuart+Gh
It’s discouraged to pass around structs of functions to replicate type classes in Gleam. Instead the preference is to not type class style patterns in your projects, favouring a concrete style instead.

>>lpil+3j
Does that mean pass every needed function as a parameter? Or just don’t write generic functionality?

>>stuart+Ml1
Yes, one would use higher order functions, as is common in Erlang, Elixir, OCaml, Elm, etc.

>>lpil+lv1
At least half of those languages (Elixir and OCaml) have some sort of mechanism for ad hoc polymorphism (elixir has behaviors and protocols, OCaml has higher order modules) so I feel like the comparison doesn't work that well personally