44 ms·

I think it's mostly trading some problems for others. I work mostly with static typing but prefer dynamic typing, and I don't feel that static typing offers mu

I think it's mostly trading some problems for others. I work mostly with static typing but prefer dynamic typing, and I don't feel that static typing offers much benefit for most programs I work on. I actually really enjoy the assertive style of Elixir/Erlang. I think that while they are dynamically typed languages, the assertive style rests somewhere between dynamic and static typing, and in fact offers some safety benefits over your average statically typed language: while you don't get it at compile time, this idiomatic code offers benefits at runtime that most people don't bother with in other languages.

valenterry 4y ago
> I don't feel that static typing offers much benefit for most programs I work on. Maybe for example you have a good memory and I don't (I certainly don't). I forget things so quickly that it's always a huge hassle for me to be productive when I have to use e.g. python. That's just one example, there are surely other different traits of people that make them prefer one over the other. Another one is that I really hate to write documentation and tests, except for very highlevel ones (UATs and high level documentation). The reason is that it gets outdated quickly and I don't like to keep it aligned. With types, they are automatically always aligned (the compiler forces me to) and it's easy to do so because there's lots of tooling for refactoring types. Maybe other people actually like that part of the job and hence don't feel that a typesystem is helping them much.