3 ms·
> there is high probability that my code will work correctly right away I'll bet my Python code has a similar probability of working correctly on the first run
by xapata 10y ago
> there is high probability that my code will work correctly right away
I'll bet my Python code has a similar probability of working correctly on the first run, conditioned on the complexity of the task.
- zzalpha 10y agoActually, based on my experience, what I found most remarkable about writing code in Haskell (which I admit I haven't done much of) is that I'd spend an enormous out of time wrestling with the compiler, but once I finally got all the type errors to clear out, the odds were surprisingly high that the code would "just work", which is not an experience I had with even other compiled languages (Java, C#, etc). 'course, it probably wouldn't work fast, and it was 50/50 whether I'd introduced space leaks, but...
- Koshkin 10y ago> conditioned on the complexity Indeed, difference in complexity is the key here.
- xapata 10y agoI'm confused. Are you agreeing with me?
- jdmichal 10y agoIt's a back-handed agreement. Static typing increases value with project complexity and head count. So yes, if you only ever do small tasks with low or singular head count, then dynamic typing probably works OK for you.
- xapata 10y agoAs complexity increases, the probability approaches zero that any code works exactly as desired on first execution. I'd still take that bet. Of course, I'd have to be able to use the REPL about as often as a someone uses a compiler.
- tome 10y ago> I'll bet my Python code has a similar probability of working correctly on the first run, conditioned on the complexity of the task. Having developed professionally in both Python and Haskell, the probability for me was significantly higher in Haskell.