Lots of industry efforts have tried to make cross system type systems (this is what GraphQL, OpenAPI, etc. are about) but they are usually awful: inexpressive and imprecise semantics.

There's opportunity here for interesting, but hard, research.

However, the constraint is shared between Rust code and a ClickHouse query. Hence it's outside the purview of any one system's static analysis.

This is often the case in Internet software. Choreographic programming is not sufficient, IIUC, as it assumes systems are all in the same language.

That episode could have really gone in a different, more philosophically inclined, direction when Sonny asks "it was real, wasn't it?"

What I'm doing is trivial with data, but I want to work with interfaces---i.e. codata---not data. So is modular programming (in the SML functor sense) the dual of standard value composition?

It feels that way, but the machinery is baroque. For example, modules (via inheritance) share a namespace.🤔

Both sides are political. Those who object to restrictive licenses should ask themselves why their believe they have the right to force their politics on the code authors.

(The answer, in the case of the posters I recognized, is that they're right-wingers who want to enforce their hierarchies.)

Nothing necessarily wrong with it, but if there is an easier to use API I would prefer that

That's enough for me! Thanks.

I don't think it has to be either / or. I feel one can hate Javascript and the database!