3 ms·
Regardless of the cycles in the computer industry, I would never consider a dynamically typed language for large projects ever again. I’ve been there, done tha
by slashdev 3y ago
Regardless of the cycles in the computer industry, I would never consider a dynamically typed language for large projects ever again.
I’ve been there, done that, and worked most of my career in dynamic languages. There’s just better tools available today. There’s no going back for me.
Python with types or TypeScript is as dynamic as I’m willing to go now, and only as a last resort.
- happymellon 3y agoI've personally found that Python with types is just not quite enough if I have to work with other people.
- lisasays 3y agoYup, it can really suck, this working other people thing. But can you elaborate or provide some examples, please? I'd like to know more about this angle.
- wryanzimmerman 3y agoMy guess is he’s referring to the way that types are fundamentally optional no-op statements in python, and therefore the level of “typing” in a given project is necessarily opinion-driven and can only be enforced through building up a lot of tooling, like making sure a type checker passes or fails all code going into deployment or CI. And even in the best case, types are duct-taped on, so there is no such thing as “perfectly type-safe” So as soon as you have two developers on one project, you have two different opinions about it.
- slashdev 3y agoI’ve also found it insufficient. I’d much rather have a stronger type system.