4 ms·

> Honestly I don't get why some people want to move to static types I don't understand how anyone that has experience with dynamically typed languages and the

> Honestly I don't get why some people want to move to static types I don't understand how anyone that has experience with dynamically typed languages and the insane runtime errors that can result from them would ever consider using a dynamically typed language. It's terrible and it actually provides little to no benefit in development speed. People always say development is faster in a dynamically typed language, this is not my experience. You need to actually run the program and step into it with a debugger in order to determine the type of anything at run time. Given the popularity of typescript and how nearly all major internet companies have moved to typed versions of their dynamically typed languages it's clear to me the whole dynamic typing experiment has failed absolutely miserably.

Mikeb85 5y ago
> People always say development is faster in a dynamically typed language, this is not my experience. You need to actually run the program and step into it with a debugger in order to determine the type of anything at run time. You just develop on the running program... If you just write it in your editor, run, check for errors, stop, edit more, run, stop, etc... then yes, you don't gain anything.
- friedman23 5y ago
  > You just develop on the running program... Ah yes, don't worry about correctness at all, just wing it. I take it you haven't had to debug some of the stuff you've written?
  - DeathArrow 5y ago
    >I take it you haven't had to debug some of the stuff you've written? Most Ruby devs work as contractors. They deliver the software and go to the next paying contract. They don't have to live with their software. :)
  - Mikeb85 5y ago
    You asked about the productivity boost... Well it's in being able to code, debug, etc... a running program. Did you miss a decade or two of CS history? Lisp and Smalltalk have been around long enough that the value of programming with dynamic languages is known... I mean, there's shaceships and whatnot running on Lisp. Or did CS simply start and end with Java?
    - friedman23 5y ago
      Why are you bringing up Java? Java is terrible in its own way. Of course you will be more productive without types if the alternative is only Java (which it isn't). Typescript has an extremely expressive type system.
DeathArrow 5y ago
>Given the popularity of typescript and how nearly all major internet companies have moved to typed versions of their dynamically typed languages it's clear to me the whole dynamic typing experiment has failed absolutely miserably. Python is one of the most popular programming languages.
- kaba0 5y ago
  Because there is a huge amount of non-programmers using it for single-use code.
  - phyrex 5y ago
    “No true Scotsman…”
- friedman23 5y ago
  And they added types to it

Mikeb85 5y ago

> People always say development is faster in a dynamically typed language, this is not my experience. You need to actually run the program and step into it with a debugger in order to determine the type of anything at run time. You just develop on the running program... If you just write it in your editor, run, check for errors, stop, edit more, run, stop, etc... then yes, you don't gain anything.

friedman23 5y ago
> You just develop on the running program... Ah yes, don't worry about correctness at all, just wing it. I take it you haven't had to debug some of the stuff you've written?
- DeathArrow 5y ago
  >I take it you haven't had to debug some of the stuff you've written? Most Ruby devs work as contractors. They deliver the software and go to the next paying contract. They don't have to live with their software. :)
- Mikeb85 5y ago
  You asked about the productivity boost... Well it's in being able to code, debug, etc... a running program. Did you miss a decade or two of CS history? Lisp and Smalltalk have been around long enough that the value of programming with dynamic languages is known... I mean, there's shaceships and whatnot running on Lisp. Or did CS simply start and end with Java?
  - friedman23 5y ago
    Why are you bringing up Java? Java is terrible in its own way. Of course you will be more productive without types if the alternative is only Java (which it isn't). Typescript has an extremely expressive type system.

DeathArrow 5y ago

>Given the popularity of typescript and how nearly all major internet companies have moved to typed versions of their dynamically typed languages it's clear to me the whole dynamic typing experiment has failed absolutely miserably. Python is one of the most popular programming languages.

kaba0 5y ago
Because there is a huge amount of non-programmers using it for single-use code.
- phyrex 5y ago
  “No true Scotsman…”
friedman23 5y ago
And they added types to it