Tech — Work — Ramblings

by Mike Kalvas

I see you're not using JavaScript (which is awesome!) on one of my pages that uses it to provide a better experience. If you see something not working right, please let me know. My site should work exactly the same without it apart from any exceptions noted here.

I use prism.min.js to do syntax highlighting. It clocks in at 23kb total in size. Since the majority of the writing I do involves coding, I personally find this to be a worthwhile trade off. If you choose to keep this disabled, rest assured, the code examples are still there, they just may have some extra whitespace and obviously no syntax highlighting.

I do no tracking at all and am a zealot about keeping my pages as small as possible. If you're reading a page of mine that transfers more than about 250kb over the wire (including my most gratuitous indulgence — fonts) I've messed up.

So, if you'd like to have a slightly richer experience, consider enabling javascript for my site and I promise your trust won't be misplaced.

202208112228 Types are not a substitute for tests

Type systems cannot and should not be viewed as a replacement for testing. Types cannot ensure that the code you wrote produces the actual outcome that you want it to. Tests on the other hand, can be used to verify and maintain that correctness.

Tests can never provide an unbroken chain of checks, from the database all the way to the frontend React props, guaranteeing that all of the data has the right shape [emphasis mine]. Types can't (usually) tell us when we accidentally put a "!" in front of a conditional. Focusing on one or the other means sacrificing quality, work efficiency, or both.¹

Conversely 202208112226 Tests are not a substitute for types.

Bernhardt, G. (2020, April 13). Execute Program. https://www.executeprogram.com/blog/are-tests-necessary-in-typescript ↩