4 ms·
I used to think this, but nowadays I avoid any language that doesn't have static typing. The difference in tooling support/IDE completions I get on practically
by Jcampuzano2 4y ago
I used to think this, but nowadays I avoid any language that doesn't have static typing.
The difference in tooling support/IDE completions I get on practically any language that has types vs those that don't is just too drastic for me.
It's also so much less mental load to have to always remember the types in my head.
Another issue I've seen in dynamic languages is when people do try to document the types via comments or otherwise, but then this drifts from reality due to not being updated.
I actually tried elixir and this is one of the main things that turned me off it.
- ch4s3 4y agoCompletions in Elixir in VSCode are as good as anything if seen in intellij for Java, through that may be a low bar. As for the burden of the mental model, I can’t really speak to that. In Elixir I usually try to think in data shapes or structures which can be matched on by function heads. I only think of types at the edges of the system.
- lukasz_samson 4y agoElixirLS developer here. Nice to hear that people like the autocompletion but comming from .net/java I think it still can do much better. It’s not very context aware and poorly handles code with parse errors
- ch4s3 4y agoIt always works well enough for my purposes.
- throwawaymaths 4y agoIt's way less of an issue due to vscode/elixir-ls auto running dialyzer in the background
- realusername 4y agoElixir does have a very good autocomplete despite the dynamic typing, it's probably the best autocomplete I've ever seen for a non typed language. The reason for that is simple, the language works with modules and data pipes, not objects which means there's way less magic to parse