34 ms·

What proof is there that companies built on dynamic typed languages struggle with server costs, payroll, or development velocity, though? Looking from the outs

What proof is there that companies built on dynamic typed languages struggle with server costs, payroll, or development velocity, though? Looking from the outside, all I can say is that both Github and especially Stripe have continued to churn out features and entire product lines well after they reached global scale… Regarding their economics, I’d have to see a serious study proving that that the effect in infra and server costs is not only real but also non-negligible, ie, it has a real impact on the bottom line, shareholder value, company efficiency, competitiveness, or what-have-you…

likeabbas 4y ago
> What proof is there that companies built on dynamic typed languages struggle with server costs The proof is in the limitations of the language. If you have a 4 CPU server and you want to run a web application, you would be able to process far more transactions per second in a Java or Go application than Ruby. This is because Ruby has a GIL which means it can't truly multithread, so to get parallelization you need to multiprocess. These days kernels can spawn threads in 5ms (or with Green threads that can be in nanoseconds), but a new process takes 50ms to spawn. Then, there's the issue of Garbage Collection pauses. Java is one of the best with some very low latency (<10ms) GCs. Ruby far from the state of the art GCs. Then there's the runtime, which Ruby can be 10-100x slower than Java or Go. It's just a matter of this logic being scaled to big levels