3 ms·
You should qualify, "Type safety is vastly overrated -- today." There was a time when type safety was very valuable to the performance and functionality of pro
by fnid 17y ago
You should qualify, "Type safety is vastly overrated -- today." There was a time when type safety was very valuable to the performance and functionality of programming. Computers are so fast now that the performance hit is almost negligible, but this wasn't always the case and dynamic languages were very very slow compared to their strictly typed brethren.
Even within the same language, strict typing and dynamic typing had big gaps in performance.
- blasdel 17y agoPlease read http://www.pphsg.org/cdsmith/types.html http://www.pphsg.org/cdsmith/types.html -- None of [safety, strict, dynamic, typing] mean what you think they mean. Your most fundamental error is that 'dynamic' and 'strict' are not mutually exclusive in the slightest. In fact, almost all dynamically type-checked language implementations are vastly more strict (and safe) than any of the non-HM static type checking implementations.