I think there are just a lot of people here getting touchy and defensive because other people aren't automatically leaping to false conclusions from this article's data, preferring to imagine that the article validates their personal choice of favourite programming language rather than engage in proper speculation about the quality of the conclusions made within the article.
I would agree that the sample size was small so programmer competency may be a big factor.
The interesting takeaway from this study I think is that it does not show that statically typed (even "pure") functional languages are not obviously better than plain old Python.
The interesting thing is not what this study proves, but what it does not prove.
> The interesting takeaway from this study I think is that it does not show that statically typed (even "pure") functional languages are not obviously better than plain old Python.
Could you elaborate more on this statement? Not a native english speaker here, so I don't quite understand the sentence. Thank you.
