4 ms·

So it might (or not) be the best option for them at this point, but on the other hand, is it another case that shows a static-typed language is a better option

• Kalium 8y ago
  I think this shows that static typing becomes more desirable and a better investment as size and complexity of a codebase - and company - grow. This might not be the same as evidence that starting with static typing is preferable.
  • gmaster1440 8y ago
    To your earlier point, larger systems are harder to migrate. This suggests that starting off with an investment in static type systems is more tenable as a long-term strategy.
    • Kalium 8y ago
      All other things being equal, that's probably true!
      • toasterlovin 8y ago
        If only all other things were equal...
        • Kalium 8y ago
          That's the catch, yes. All other things are very rarely equal. There are almost always other factors worth paying attention to when forming a long-term strategy. A handful that spring to mind are availability of talent, software runtime performance, schedule impact of static vs dynamic typing, and expected runway of the business. Producing a statically typed system that runs slowly and correctly after the business has folded is not always more valuable than producing a buggy one in time to start producing revenue.
• blain_the_train 8y ago
  It doesn't come even close to that. There are works that attempt to tackle this issue, if your interested I would look at those