4 ms·
From my perspective, the fact that so much of computing has consolidated around a language that cannot support even the most rudimentary code completion or stat
by bleepblorp 6y ago
From my perspective, the fact that so much of computing has consolidated around a language that cannot support even the most rudimentary code completion or static analysis tools is deeply unfortunate. As a result of Python's mass adoption, uncountable thousands of hours of developer time have been wasted hunting down bugs that would have been caught by tooling in any statically-typed language.
Unless Python can fix this, by adopting static typing, it's not entirely fit for purpose in the ecosystem niche it has come to dominate. Replacing Python with a better language would be a net productivity boon for developers and scientists almost everywhere.
- jakobnissen 6y agoI think you're hitting on the main pain point of Julia. My bet is that we'll see strong typing dominate in the coming decade, with assistance from linters/static analysis becoming default. Unfortunately, this is not too easy to create using Julia. Much easier than Python, sure, but not too easy. Tellingly, the Julia community apparently does not care for static analysis and have not begun to develop the capacity for it. As a consequence, much Julia code is written in a way that is un-analyzable, which digs it deeper into weak typing.