3 ms·

>Type annotations don’t double productivity. What does “increase safety by 2×” even mean? What metric are you tracking there? My own anecdotal metric. Isn't th

>Type annotations don’t double productivity. What does “increase safety by 2×” even mean? What metric are you tracking there? My own anecdotal metric. Isn't that obvious? The initial post was an anecdotal opinion as well. I don't see a problem here. >In my experience, the main non-documentation benefit of type annotations is warning where the code is assuming a value where None might be present. Mixing up any other kind of types is an extremely rare scenario, but NoneType gets everywhere if you let it. It's not just None. Imagine some highly complex object with nested values and you have some function like this: def modify_direction(direction_object) -> ... wtf is direction object? Is it in Cartesian or is it in polar? Is in 2D or 3D? Most old school python devs literally have to find where modify_direction is called and they find this: def modify_data(data) -> ... ... modify_direction(data.quat) Ok then you have to find where modify data is called, and so on and so forth until you get to here: def combind_data(quat) -> ... def create_quat() -> quat And then boom you figure out what it does by actually reading all the complex quaternion math create_quat does. Absolutely insane. If I have a type, I can just look at the type to figure everything out... you can see how much faster it is. Oh and get this. Let's say there's someone who feels euler angles are better. So he changes create_quat to create_euler. He modifies all the places create_quat is used (which is about 40 places) and he misses 3 or 4 places where it's called. He then ships it to production. Boom The extra time debugging production when it crashes, ans also extra time tediously finding where create_quat was used. All of that could have been saved by a type checker. I'm a big python guy. But I'm also big into haskell. So I know both the typing worlds and the untyped worlds really well. Most people who complain like you literally have mostly come from a python background where typing isn't used much. Maybe you used types occasionally but not in a big way. If you used both untyped languages and typed languages extensively you will know that types are intrinsically better. It's not even a contest. Anyone who still debates this stuff just lacks experience.

JimDabell 1y ago
> My own anecdotal metric. Isn't that obvious? The initial post was an anecdotal opinion as well. I don't see a problem here. WTF is “an anecdotal metric”‽ That just sounds like an evasive way to say “I want to make up numbers I can’t justify”. > wtf is direction object? Is it in Cartesian or is it in polar? Is in 2D or 3D? This seems very domain-specific. > Most people who complain like you literally have mostly come from a python background where typing isn't used much. Maybe you used types occasionally but not in a big way. > If you used both untyped languages and typed languages extensively you will know that types are intrinsically better. It's not even a contest. Anyone who still debates this stuff just lacks experience. I’ve got many years of experience with static typed languages over a 25 year career. Just because somebody disagrees with you, it doesn’t mean they are a clueless junior.
- IshKebab 1y ago
  > WTF is “an anecdotal metric” It's a metric (how much more productive he is), and anecdotal (base only on his experience). Pretty obvious I would have thought. > This seems very domain-specific. It was an example from one domain but all domains have types of things. Are you really trying to say that only 3D games specifically would benefit from static types? > Just because somebody disagrees with you, it doesn’t mean they are a clueless junior. Clueless senior then I guess? Honestly I don't know how you can have this much experience and still not come to the obvious conclusion. Perhaps you only write small scripts or solo projects where it's more feasible to get away without static types? What would you say to someone who said "I have 25 years of experience reading books with punctuation and I think that punctuation is a waste of time. Just because you disagree with me doesn't mean I'm clueless."?
- ninetyninenine 1y ago
  >WTF is “an anecdotal metric”‽ That just sounds like an evasive way to say “I want to make up numbers I can’t justify”. What I have to have scientific papers for every fucking opinion I have? The initial Parent post was an anecdotal opinion. Your post is an opinion. I can't have opinions here without citing a scientific paper that's 20 pages long and no is going to read but just blindly trust because it's "science"? Come on. What I'm saying is self evident to people who know. There are thousands of things like this in the world where people just know even though statistical proof hasn't been measured or established. For example eating horse shit everyday probably isn't healthy even though it there isn't SCIENCE that proves this action as unhealthy directly. Type checking is just one of those things. OBVIOUSLY I think development is overall much better, much faster and much safer with types. I can't prove it with metrics, but I'm confident my "anecdotal" metrics with I prefaced with "roughly" are "roughly" ballpark trueish. >This seems very domain-specific. Domain specific? Basic orientation with quaternions and euler angles is specific to reality. Orientation and rotations exist in reality and there are thousands and thousands of domains that use it. Also the example itself is generic. Replace euler angles and quats with vectors and polar coordinates. Or cats and dogs. Same shit. >I’ve got many years of experience with static typed languages over a 25 year career. Just because somebody disagrees with you, it doesn’t mean they are a clueless junior. The amount of years of experience is irrelevant. I know tons of developers with only 5 years of experience who are better than me and tons of developers with 25+ who are horrible. I got 25 years as well. If someone disagrees with me (on this specific topic), it absolutely doesn't mean they are a junior. It means they lack knowledge and experience. This is a fact. It's not an insult. It just means for a specific thing they don't have experience or knowledge which is typical. I'm sure there's tons of things where you could have more experience. Just not this topic. If you have experience with static languages it likely isn't that extensive. You're likely more of a old school python guy who spend a ton of time programming without types.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
jampekka 1y ago
> If you used both untyped languages and typed languages extensively you will know that types are intrinsically better. It's not even a contest. Anyone who still debates this stuff just lacks experience. Or have enough experience to have lived e.g. the J2EE and C++ template hells and see where this is going.
- ninetyninenine 1y ago
  typing can get extreme to the point where it becomes proof based typing. So I know what you mean here. I've lived through it and done it. In general types outweigh no types EVEN with the above.

JimDabell 1y ago

> My own anecdotal metric. Isn't that obvious? The initial post was an anecdotal opinion as well. I don't see a problem here. WTF is “an anecdotal metric”‽ That just sounds like an evasive way to say “I want to make up numbers I can’t justify”. > wtf is direction object? Is it in Cartesian or is it in polar? Is in 2D or 3D? This seems very domain-specific. > Most people who complain like you literally have mostly come from a python background where typing isn't used much. Maybe you used types occasionally but not in a big way. > If you used both untyped languages and typed languages extensively you will know that types are intrinsically better. It's not even a contest. Anyone who still debates this stuff just lacks experience. I’ve got many years of experience with static typed languages over a 25 year career. Just because somebody disagrees with you, it doesn’t mean they are a clueless junior.

IshKebab 1y ago
> WTF is “an anecdotal metric” It's a metric (how much more productive he is), and anecdotal (base only on his experience). Pretty obvious I would have thought. > This seems very domain-specific. It was an example from one domain but all domains have types of things. Are you really trying to say that only 3D games specifically would benefit from static types? > Just because somebody disagrees with you, it doesn’t mean they are a clueless junior. Clueless senior then I guess? Honestly I don't know how you can have this much experience and still not come to the obvious conclusion. Perhaps you only write small scripts or solo projects where it's more feasible to get away without static types? What would you say to someone who said "I have 25 years of experience reading books with punctuation and I think that punctuation is a waste of time. Just because you disagree with me doesn't mean I'm clueless."?
ninetyninenine 1y ago
>WTF is “an anecdotal metric”‽ That just sounds like an evasive way to say “I want to make up numbers I can’t justify”. What I have to have scientific papers for every fucking opinion I have? The initial Parent post was an anecdotal opinion. Your post is an opinion. I can't have opinions here without citing a scientific paper that's 20 pages long and no is going to read but just blindly trust because it's "science"? Come on. What I'm saying is self evident to people who know. There are thousands of things like this in the world where people just know even though statistical proof hasn't been measured or established. For example eating horse shit everyday probably isn't healthy even though it there isn't SCIENCE that proves this action as unhealthy directly. Type checking is just one of those things. OBVIOUSLY I think development is overall much better, much faster and much safer with types. I can't prove it with metrics, but I'm confident my "anecdotal" metrics with I prefaced with "roughly" are "roughly" ballpark trueish. >This seems very domain-specific. Domain specific? Basic orientation with quaternions and euler angles is specific to reality. Orientation and rotations exist in reality and there are thousands and thousands of domains that use it. Also the example itself is generic. Replace euler angles and quats with vectors and polar coordinates. Or cats and dogs. Same shit. >I’ve got many years of experience with static typed languages over a 25 year career. Just because somebody disagrees with you, it doesn’t mean they are a clueless junior. The amount of years of experience is irrelevant. I know tons of developers with only 5 years of experience who are better than me and tons of developers with 25+ who are horrible. I got 25 years as well. If someone disagrees with me (on this specific topic), it absolutely doesn't mean they are a junior. It means they lack knowledge and experience. This is a fact. It's not an insult. It just means for a specific thing they don't have experience or knowledge which is typical. I'm sure there's tons of things where you could have more experience. Just not this topic. If you have experience with static languages it likely isn't that extensive. You're likely more of a old school python guy who spend a ton of time programming without types.

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

jampekka 1y ago

> If you used both untyped languages and typed languages extensively you will know that types are intrinsically better. It's not even a contest. Anyone who still debates this stuff just lacks experience. Or have enough experience to have lived e.g. the J2EE and C++ template hells and see where this is going.

ninetyninenine 1y ago
typing can get extreme to the point where it becomes proof based typing. So I know what you mean here. I've lived through it and done it. In general types outweigh no types EVEN with the above.