3 ms·
If you are truly doing an apples to apples comparison here, I suspect you’re using a struct subset of your dynamic language. Otherwise I can’t see how the addit
by wellpast 7y ago
If you are truly doing an apples to apples comparison here, I suspect you’re using a struct subset of your dynamic language. Otherwise I can’t see how the addition of a rule-based static-check pass filter gets you faster.
What are the two static & dynamic languages you’re comparing by the way?
- verttii 7y agoFor example now I'm building a Servant API on Haskell. It's basically a strongly typed API that you don't need to validate with tests. You only need to test the handlers that handle business logic. In other languages with a less sophisticated type systems I would need to build validation functions manually and obviously test them. Hell, an interpreted language might even boot up with functions that have faulty code, ultimately producing runtime errors when invoked. Haskell generally would not (because of the type system). Adding type constraints basically limits the range of possible inputs/outputs, requiring you to write far less tests.
- mbrodersen 7y agoMy examples would be Javascript vs Typescript. I am SO much more productive in Typescript than in Javascript and the number of bugs have dropped substantially.