2 ms·

I really think a lot of it depends on your stack. On the web application side, I find static typing to be entirely an impediment - usually because the types tha

I really think a lot of it depends on your stack. On the web application side, I find static typing to be entirely an impediment - usually because the types that I really care about are already defined at the database level. Every statically typed language I've worked with on the web just ends up forcing you to duplicate the same already defined structure in multiple places, writing a ton of extra code that provides marginal benefit but creates a major negative impact on productivity. For many other areas, especially on phones, embedded devices or desktop software static types will make a lot more sense. I think languages where the primary focus is data exchange the benefits are less pronounced. That's just my experience though.

RussianCow 9y ago
But it's still incredibly beneficial to annotate the edges of your API. Not only does that quickly catch mistakes where you break the API contract, but it also serves as built-in documentation on the shape of the data you are serving, especially if you are using a dynamic format like JSON. And that's the beauty of having static types in a language like Python: you don't have to annotate everything, and can be selective about where you apply static typing to get the most bang for your buck.
- brightball 9y ago
  I can appreciate that. I like the add where helpful approach. It’s having to do it everywhere that’s such a problem.
LeonidasXIV 9y ago
> On the web application side, I find static typing to be entirely an impediment - usually because the types that I really care about are already defined at the database level. I disagree here. Take one example, Slack. They publish "types" for their API that they don't adhere to, since every endpoint of their API that is supposed to return that "type" is returning something else. That could've been solved with a type system or schema validation which in itself is a weak form of a type system.

RussianCow 9y ago

But it's still incredibly beneficial to annotate the edges of your API. Not only does that quickly catch mistakes where you break the API contract, but it also serves as built-in documentation on the shape of the data you are serving, especially if you are using a dynamic format like JSON. And that's the beauty of having static types in a language like Python: you don't have to annotate everything, and can be selective about where you apply static typing to get the most bang for your buck.

brightball 9y ago
I can appreciate that. I like the add where helpful approach. It’s having to do it everywhere that’s such a problem.

LeonidasXIV 9y ago

> On the web application side, I find static typing to be entirely an impediment - usually because the types that I really care about are already defined at the database level. I disagree here. Take one example, Slack. They publish "types" for their API that they don't adhere to, since every endpoint of their API that is supposed to return that "type" is returning something else. That could've been solved with a type system or schema validation which in itself is a weak form of a type system.