3 ms·
I believe dynamically typed languages are easier to use than old-style statically typed langages (Java, C, etc). More modern statically typed languages can be
by sdeframond 4y ago
I believe dynamically typed languages are easier to use than old-style statically typed langages (Java, C, etc).
More modern statically typed languages can be quite easy to use (I am thinking of Scala) but none provides an ecosystem as rich as python's.
Plus, recent static languages (Scala, Rust, Haskell or even Elm) are more oriented toward "Software Engineers" or CS academics. Python appeals to a lot of "programmers" who's main job is actually data science, mechanical engineering, biologist...
- epgui 4y agoI think the latter point hits the nail right on the head: the preference for python is probably more of a social issue than a technical one at this particular point in History. I think when FP languages and paradigms become the norm (you can quote me on this, I predict that it's only a matter of time), preferences will change. People tend to prefer what they know, and it will take some time for culture to change.
- gilch 4y agoI found Scala horribly overwrought compared to either Java or Haskell. It's like it tried to mush together two different type systems and got the worst of both worlds. Languages do not need to be that complex. My next JVM language was Clojure, and I've never looked back. I'd try Kotlin before I'd go back to Scala.