I don't really see this comparison as being particularly useful. There isn't really a choice between DI or dynamic scoping, there's just a choice between appli

I don't really see this comparison as being particularly useful. There isn't really a choice between DI or dynamic scoping, there's just a choice between application architectures, which is largely dictated by language. The Closure example works because all your foreign symbols are coming from namespaced imports, which is to say you have a Module architecture and your only polymorphism lever is altering the namespace mapping to point to an equivalent module. With Java and the like you have a Service architecture, so rather than importing symbols you're injecting services. Things that would otherwise be exported as bare functions tend to be written as classes so that they can be used as services. While some languages can support either (i.e. JS is typically modular but there are things like Bottle if you want to write JS in a service-based way), it's not typical that a given application is going to support either simultaneously. Most languages have a clear idiomatic choice that you're likely not going to want to stray from to avoid headaches integrating 3rd party dependencies and developers other than yourself.