4 ms·
Java is very verbouse, that's why I picked on it. You would simply have to write a lot more LOC, which would take more time, be more code to maintain, and so on
by erokar 8y ago
Java is very verbouse, that's why I picked on it. You would simply have to write a lot more LOC, which would take more time, be more code to maintain, and so on. It's not a matter of static vs. dynamic, Haskell for instance is probably at least as succinct as Ruby (though I doubt you'll find a Hasekll web framework as productive as Rails).
- vitro 8y agoI never get this argument. With current state of IDEs, there is maybe more LOC in the end but many of those lines are written for you and if you know your way around, it is actually very fast to write Java.
- erokar 8y agoIt's not the time it takes to write the code I'm concerned about. With more LOC per feature there is more code to maintain, there are probably more bugs, and there is more code one has to comprehend to understand what the system does. That has a significant cost.
- goatlover 8y agoImagine having a state of the art IDE and a succinct language! Something like Smalltalk.
- rozhok 8y agoAs a Java dev I would say you'll spent more time on restarting and redeploying your app, especially if it's quite big.