3 ms·

> two groups of people implement the same thing The obvious problem with that is that dynamically typed languages are great for prototyping things ... and impl

• didibus 9y ago
  > But statically typed languages really shine for maintenance and refactoring. Possibly, I've not been able to find any research related to the impact of the typing discipline on maintenance. All there is out there are studies on defect count of large code base projects. And those showed only marginal differences, certain dynamic languages like Clojure even beat out all others. So at least in terms of maintening quality over time, dynamic languages seem to hold up to static languages. What I've been trying to get data on is productivity over time. I know dynamic languages are more productive at the beginning, but do static languages get more productive over time is a good question. I still feel probably not, I think it's still just all a big feeling, but I've got no data on it.