3 ms·
If these dynamic languages are usually used in a mostly-static manner, just without the typing and some added load-time flexibility, doesn't that just mean they
by Xuzz 16y ago
If these dynamic languages are usually used in a mostly-static manner, just without the typing and some added load-time flexibility, doesn't that just mean they operate at a higher level of abstraction? Isn't that a good thing?
- chromatic 16y agoYour definition of good may or may not include "do these higher level abstractions preclude, in theory and practice, well-known and cheap optimizations?"
- Xuzz 16y agoDepends if you care about "code fast" or "develop fast".
- kristianp 16y agoIt would be cool if a language could be both, by using this research to create a language that recognises the difference between load time and run time. The dynamic parts would be used to load the program, after which dynamic changes would be turned off, allowing function dispatch or whatever it is that is slow in a dynamic language to be sped up.
- Xuzz 16y agoBasically, a (very!) enhanced preprocessor? That would definitely be useful.
- supersillyus 16y agoFor some definitions, yes, they are operating at a higher level of abstraction. However, abstraction isn't by itself a good thing.