Hacker News Reader

Comment by pytester | Hacker News Reader

>I can't help the feeling that your post is about Python vs Java rather than static vs dynamic.

Because the OP was about python and because python and java are the two languages where I have worked on refactorings of large scale code bases.

I can't help but feel that if you make a hypothesis (e.g. "static typing is naturally better"), you need to be open to examples that disprove this hypothesis.

>And I don't see how your 3 points about the velocity thing are affected by static types..

Static typing usually means a lot of time spent satisfying the compiler. I don't disagree that this can be useful because it catches bugs (although a lot of stuff caught by compilers are not bugs). I disagree that this isn't a cost/benefit trade off that naturally works out.

View on HN

I don't think you disprove the hypothesis, though. I think you are talking about equally, if not more, important thing - ergonomics. Java is not an example of static types not bringing in benefits, it's an example of overcoming those benefits by other things.

> I disagree that this isn't a cost/benefit trade off that naturally works out.

I agree, it is. I just think that programming languages are a whole package and Java is really bad with this cost/benefit ratio. I'd rather see something else being an ambassador of static types.

>I don't think you disprove the hypothesis, though. I think you are talking about equally, if not more, important thing - ergonomics

Types are an intrinsic part of ergonomics.

>I'd rather see something else being an ambassador of static types.

I'd be happy to see another language be an "ambassador of static types" provided the tip of the iceberg of 'visible things built in it' doesn't compromise of say, one spam filter and a file converter.

I'm getting pretty tired of hearing about how awesome and productive haskell's type system is for 15 whole years and seeing a whole lot of evidence that it's waaaaaay too unproductive to build anything of use in it.

Rust is a fine ambassador of static types (and has some great usage examples), but rust and python address extremely different non-overlapping markets and rust isn't shy about the fact it makes it fucking hard to compile things in.

> Types are an intrinsic part of ergonomics.

For example creating new type in Java and Rust is a whole different world. If you can't separate Java the language from the idea of static typing and type systems, you are probably not a person suited for such discussion.

As for your remarks about Haskell, welp, I have build things with Haskell and Python, and it's not even close. But I guess chasing runtime exceptions during development is an acquired taste.

>If you can't separate Java the language from the idea of static typing and type systems

I can. It's people who make blanket statements about static or dynamic typing who can't.

>I guess chasing runtime exceptions during development is an acquired taste.

Much like building software people actually use.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com