3 ms·

I’m not sure what your analogy is getting at. Many typed languages are compiled. A lot of them are faster than interpreted languages—also, because they are type

• saghm 7y ago
  I think the speed of the Ferrari in this case is referring to the speed of development in a scripting language (not the speed of programs written in the language), and the protection of a tank is referring to the protection from certain classes of errors that static typing gives.
  • bluejekyll 7y ago
    Ah I see. Though that in itself seems to be a matter of opinion/comfort with a language. I’m a much faster developer in languages that are able to produce decent documentation about their typed interfaces, than I am in languages that are much more loosely defined. There’s an amount of uncertainty in interpreted languages that always leaves me questioning the code—uncertain that it handles the cases I think it does.
    • silentsea90 7y ago
      Yup! I think you may be referring to a more production like usecase here. If you had to parse a csv to convert a column from Fahrenheit to Celsius and output that with the first column in a separate csv (dummy example) - python is so much faster to develop. If you had to write this as a feature in a maintainable way, that's when python would start to suck