3 ms·
(I haven't watched the talk because nothing you said makes me expect hearing something new.) WRT verbosity and cognitive overload: I honestly challenge this st
by stewbrew 9y ago
(I haven't watched the talk because nothing you said makes me expect hearing something new.)
WRT verbosity and cognitive overload: I honestly challenge this statement. In a modern statically typed language, you have to add a few type annotations here and there but in exchange you can skip most runtime checks (and sometimes nullity checks). You don't have to remember the type of a variable because the compiler can tell you.
I admit dynamically typed languages are nice for interactive exploration in the REPL but that's about it.
Too bad typed clojure didn't become the mainstream closure.
- hellofunk 9y agoThe cognitive overhead is really not about type annotations. It's about program structure. If you watch the video, I think there are some good points made.
- gw 9y ago> I admit dynamically typed languages are nice for interactive exploration in the REPL but that's about it. For Clojure programmers, "interactive exploration in the REPL" is the primary way we write programs. So, if one admits that dynamic typing is ideal for this, then making Clojure dynamic was the right choice.
- stewbrew 9y agoNo, because you usually have to maintain programs, add features later on, rewrite/refactor parts of the program. Do you write only one-off scripts?
- gw 9y agoI must emphasize that any time we "maintain programs, add features later on, rewrite/refactor parts of the program", we are doing so with a REPL. We don't just use the REPL for one-off scripts.
- sbov 9y agoAs someone who recently moved to Clojure, REPL based programming is a completely different experience. It isn't like using python's REPL.