4 ms·

But the choice between static and dynamic typing (or duck typing add described here) is not cost neutral. Dynamically typed languages can be much quicker and c

But the choice between static and dynamic typing (or duck typing add described here) is not cost neutral. Dynamically typed languages can be much quicker and cheaper to write, making for more rapid business product cycles. The lack of type safety can largely be made up by adding to the already necessary unit tests. Isn't that how the YouTube startup out-manoeuvred Google's much larger dev team working with static types?

AnimalMuppet 7y ago
> Dynamically typed languages can be much quicker and cheaper to write... Code isn't just written, though. It's read, modified, and maintained. Sure, you can write it faster. But are you building that program for this week, or for the next two decades? (Yes, I know, you can be in a situation where writing it faster now is life-or-death for the company. Most of us won't spend most of our careers in that situation, though.)