It depends how it's applied. I like type inference when I'm defining a variable, for example. In Go, I can just write this:

    message := "hello world"

...and the compiler knows it's a string, and I know it's a string because I can just hover it with my mouse and my IDE will tell me that. That's good enough for me.

But when we are talking about functions..:

    # some fictional function I just came up with
    def install_requirements(dependencies, opts):
        run_setup(dependencies, opts)
        return assert_requirements_installed(dependencies)

Now I'm confused. What is the data type of "dependencies" and "opts"? Is the IDE smart enough to tell me that? What if I'm building a function that assumes "dependencies" to be of type A, but the compiler thinks it can also be type "B"?

I don't know enough about compilers and type inference to know whether this is actually a problem in Acton or not. I wish they explained more. My gripe against this kind of inference is that it's impossible for my IDE to tell me what is being passed around. In Java, for example, I can CTRL+Click on a data type and the IDE will show me the definition; can Acton do the same?