Hacker News Reader

Comment by magicalhippo | Hacker News Reader

> You would be better off using dynamic typing and returning an Iterator.

The point is that most of the time I wouldn't know it's returning an Iterator, because it's poorly or not document. At least that is my experience.

Anyway, I was only speaking for myself. And my personal experience is exactly the opposite: I'm far less productive in dynamic languages when working on any non-trivial codebase, for the reasons I stated.

View on HN

Yes but if you were Tabula Rasa you would ship out software features 3x faster with significantly less bugs using dynamic typing than if you used static typing.

That is quite frankly a ridiculous, unsubstantiated statement.

Smalltalk’s Proven Productivity

https://medium.com/smalltalk-talk/smalltalk-s-proven-product...

http://www.ifpug.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/IYSM.-Thirty...

Both links reference the same source material — "Table 16: Side-by-Side Comparison of function points and lines of code metrics"

Seems like a comparison of Smalltalk using an IDE and Java using Notepad?

Not really credible is it.

There are tons of other sources saying the same thing. Static typing might be the popular fad on Hacker News but all the evidence points against it.

Please provide some sources saying something about Smalltalk's Proven Productivity.

Thank you for proving my point. Nowhere near 3x and not even consistently better than static typing.

As someone who codes in both static and dynamic typed languages commercially, 3x is around the correct figure.

For you perhaps. With over 30 years of programming experience I feel very confident it's not the case for me.

I'm too lazy to learn how to use something isn't a very good argument :)

Good thing that isn't the argument I'm making then.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com