32 ms·
> If your devs are pushing code into production that doesn't pass the tests (or they aren't even running the test suite) then you're asking for trouble no matte
by pushpop 8y ago
> If your devs are pushing code into production that doesn't pass the tests (or they aren't even running the test suite) then you're asking for trouble no matter what language you use.
Clearly that’s not even remotely what I said. But I’ve posted the same thing twice already. I see no point posting it a 3rd time.
- UncleEntity 8y agoMy understanding of your argument is it's too much of a burden for devs to run a static type checker manually so the language should force you to run it as part of the compilation process. Sure, yeah, if you want to ensure type safety then use a type safe language...argument over. ...unless you want to do something like duck punch some function into someone else's library and you really don't want to rearchitech how the whole thing works because of that one special case which just doesn't quite work.
- pushpop 8y agoYeah I agree dynamic languages have their place too. I’m actually extremely agnostic about languages. That said, I’ve been on projects debugging code that has had functions overridden like that and it wasn’t fun. Sometimes people can get too clever for their own good. But you can have that problem regardless of the language