

Static vs. Dynamic language development time - pavpanchekha
http://wadler.blogspot.com/2011/09/experiment-about-static-and-dynamic.html

======
rjd
I'll call bull sh/t on the whole test.

I'd hazard a guess that learning a new language that is dynamic is easier than
learning one that is static. Reason being dynamic languages are more forgiving
to the new user.

For this reason they are also easier to prototype with, having productivity
boosts at the start of a project. You don't need to plan as much.

Where as static typed languages are more slower and require more structure at
the start, but the productivity boosts come later on when you have to support
and alter the thing.

Plus if you now your language well you are probably going to be quite fast, if
you don't you'll probably be quite slow. And a decent framework will get a
most languages flying anyway. When I started programming it would takes a
months work to get a project unto a level which is just turnkey these days.

IMO stick to the language you enjoy and don't buy into hype and people with
agendas.

~~~
artsrc
> Where as static typed languages are more slower and require more structure
> at the start, but the productivity boosts come later on when you have to
> support and alter the thing.

This seems like a useful test. Create a code base and ask participants to add
some features and fix some issues.

> IMO stick to the language you enjoy and don't buy into hype and people with
> agendas.

A dearth of real studies makes hype and agendas the only thing there is.

~~~
rjd
On a personal level I find that its the IDE's that make the gains as opposed
to the language. But its the statically type nature where the boons really
kick in.

When working with foreign code statically typed interrogation is amazing. For
me it means I don't have to hold someone else's entire bird nest model in my
mind to fix something minor.

I can just interrogate the flow, easily check for dependancies, and go. Maybe
whack out a few unit tests, to wrap the flow so I make I have it correct, then
boom job done.

I'm sure people will be horrified at my approach. But I get lots of kudos for
my speed and reliability, returning customers... so it works for me at least,
and people are validating me so I'll keep doing it. I don't really use units
tests not he first run. I slowly add them as I adjust the solution. I do this
for speed mainly... as I find I refactor to much early on. For myself most
testing regimes feel as useful as some one cutting my achilles heel if the
code hasn't stabled.

