I kind of disagree. A kind of hidden point I loved about Norvig's presentation is that there are design patterns useful and proper for Dynamic languages. The ma

I kind of disagree. A kind of hidden point I loved about Norvig's presentation is that there are design patterns useful and proper for Dynamic languages. The main problem is trying to use design patterns created for static languages, in dynamic languages. I remember reading the Ruby book about design patterns. It was painful and the general motto of the book was "you don't need this and that static design pattern". However, I think as a community we should be defining a collection of design patterns that are useful in dynamic languages. At the end of the day, the main idea behind Design Patterns was the definition of higher-level logic constructs that could be used to solve a problem when developing software. It is like in the construction industry where bricks are the "code" and the 'best practices' (design patterns) of how to built houses with bricks do not apply when you are building a house using wood. Sure, brick design patterns do not work for wood, but that does not mean that wood building doesn't have their own patterns.