5 ms·

Steve Yegge, famously linked the Software Engineering with political axis. Interestingly he named people "Liberal" who prefer Dynamic languages over static. h

by tegeek 12y ago

Steve Yegge, famously linked the Software Engineering with political axis. Interestingly he named people "Liberal" who prefer Dynamic languages over static. https://plus.google.com/110981030061712822816/posts/KaSKeg4vQtz https://plus.google.com/110981030061712822816/posts/KaSKeg4v...

allegory 12y ago
As a pragmatist, I take from both sides always and I think a lot of us do. To apply it to politics: http://www.allmystery.de/i/t5be775_subgenius_big.jpg http://www.allmystery.de/i/t5be775_subgenius_big.jpg Python with static type hinting is where I want to be.
- mercurial 12y ago
  OCaml works for me: it's readable and about as succinct as Python. Though of course the ecosystem is much smaller.
  - allegory 12y ago
    Good choice but I tried it but couldn't get on with it to be honest. That's just down to me, not the language though.
    - mercurial 12y ago
      I'm not saying it's not clunky, but all in all it's fairly pragmatic. That said, I'm a big Python fan as well. Of all the dynamic languages I work/worked with, it's the one that tries hardest to be less of a footgun, and it has a strong tradition of decent documentation (hear, hear, OCaml library developers...).
- lmm 12y ago
  That was what I wanted before I found Scala. If your dislike for OCaml was about syntax or ecosystem then you might also like Scala.
  - allegory 12y ago
    I disklike Scala. I want less runtime baggage if possible or at least a nice wrapper around it (like venv is in python 3.4)
    - lmm 12y ago
      I'm not sure I understand. I use the maven shade plugin, so all there is at runtime is the JVM (system package) and the jar (built from libraries, but all of that's handled nicely with maven and its plugins), which can be fetched by http(s) from the repository and then just run (java -jar xyz.jar). There's no wrapping at the filesystem level but there doesn't need to be, because the classpath lets code load everything it needs from within that one jar file.
      - allegory 12y ago
        That's ok until it goes wrong at which point you need to know the JVM inside out and Maven. I do know a lot about them but don't desire retaining that information :)
        lmm 12y ago
        Shrug; I've found I spend less time debugging non-scala code when working in scala than I spend debugging non-python code when working in python. (When many popular python libraries go wrong, you need to know C).
        allegory 12y ago
        I know C so that's fine for me. It just doesn't suit me that is all.
- CmonDev 12y ago
  Or even better: opt-in dynamic as in C#.
- kyllo 12y ago
  Clojure + core.typed sounds like an ideal balance to me. I haven't actually used it yet but I might for my next side project. http://typedclojure.org/ http://typedclojure.org/
judk 12y ago
Let's not humiliate him by dragging his past mistakes into the limelight

by tegeek 12y ago

allegory 12y ago

As a pragmatist, I take from both sides always and I think a lot of us do. To apply it to politics: http://www.allmystery.de/i/t5be775_subgenius_big.jpg http://www.allmystery.de/i/t5be775_subgenius_big.jpg Python with static type hinting is where I want to be.

mercurial 12y ago
OCaml works for me: it's readable and about as succinct as Python. Though of course the ecosystem is much smaller.
- allegory 12y ago
  Good choice but I tried it but couldn't get on with it to be honest. That's just down to me, not the language though.
  - mercurial 12y ago
    I'm not saying it's not clunky, but all in all it's fairly pragmatic. That said, I'm a big Python fan as well. Of all the dynamic languages I work/worked with, it's the one that tries hardest to be less of a footgun, and it has a strong tradition of decent documentation (hear, hear, OCaml library developers...).
lmm 12y ago
That was what I wanted before I found Scala. If your dislike for OCaml was about syntax or ecosystem then you might also like Scala.
- allegory 12y ago
  I disklike Scala. I want less runtime baggage if possible or at least a nice wrapper around it (like venv is in python 3.4)
  - lmm 12y ago
    I'm not sure I understand. I use the maven shade plugin, so all there is at runtime is the JVM (system package) and the jar (built from libraries, but all of that's handled nicely with maven and its plugins), which can be fetched by http(s) from the repository and then just run (java -jar xyz.jar). There's no wrapping at the filesystem level but there doesn't need to be, because the classpath lets code load everything it needs from within that one jar file.
    - allegory 12y ago
      That's ok until it goes wrong at which point you need to know the JVM inside out and Maven. I do know a lot about them but don't desire retaining that information :)
      - lmm 12y ago
        Shrug; I've found I spend less time debugging non-scala code when working in scala than I spend debugging non-python code when working in python. (When many popular python libraries go wrong, you need to know C).
        allegory 12y ago
        I know C so that's fine for me. It just doesn't suit me that is all.
CmonDev 12y ago
Or even better: opt-in dynamic as in C#.
kyllo 12y ago
Clojure + core.typed sounds like an ideal balance to me. I haven't actually used it yet but I might for my next side project. http://typedclojure.org/ http://typedclojure.org/

judk 12y ago

Let's not humiliate him by dragging his past mistakes into the limelight