4 ms·
I'm the author. Well, it is my opinion in fact, and that's why it says a "%100 opinionated view" in the subtitle. There are many other persons with the same o
by david04 11y ago
I'm the author.
Well, it is my opinion in fact, and that's why it says a "%100 opinionated view" in the subtitle.
There are many other persons with the same opinion:
http://stackoverflow.com/a/43072/731933 http://stackoverflow.com/a/43072/731933
http://blog.jooq.org/2014/12/11/the-inconvenient-truth-about-dynamic-vs-static-typing/ http://blog.jooq.org/2014/12/11/the-inconvenient-truth-about...
http://www.teamten.com/lawrence/writings/java-for-everything.html http://www.teamten.com/lawrence/writings/java-for-everything...
If we were to discuss everything in this article, starting with dynamic vs static typing, we'd still be here 3 months from now :). Which is why it is opinionated.
- jpitz 11y agoYou may want to move Delphi out of the list of dynamically typed languages. It is just as strongly typed as C# or Java.
- david04 11y agoUps, thank you for that! : )
- m0skit0 11y agoYeah, I was just going to edit my comment to say "well, at least the author states it is 100% Opinionated View" :) But you could skip that part and have more arguments, although without it you couldn't easily rule out some languages (e.g. LISP). I have to admit I'm also biased as a Clojure fan, and I find Scala too verbose and less functional than Clojure. Oh and btw, I read it all :P
- ska 11y agoThe problem with that section isn't so much that it is opinionated, it's that you can't really have a sensible discussion about typing on just a dynamic vs. static axis. At the very least you should address the implications of strong vs. weak typing, and you should probably address the strength and nature of the type systems, also. After all, saying that both C and Haskell are statically largely misses the point.