Android, evolvability and Comcast

Re:Android, evolvability and Comcast by krzyk on Sunday April 23, 2017 @01:22PM (#14179141)

But there is a single problem with React Native: Javascript (and all languages that come from it). It's frequently one of the most hated ones as it is loved.

Dynamic language is not necessary the best thing invented, if it were there wouldn't be any other kind of languages.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Android, evolvability and Comcast by tumblen on Sunday April 23, 2017 @03:29PM (#14179952)

Lots of great experiences with Typescript being reported and I am loving Flowtype lately so the era of only dynamic JS is fading out.

A lot of the JS hate goes out the window with ES6 and type systems.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Android, evolvability and Comcast by paulddraper on Sunday April 23, 2017 @03:27PM (#14179947)

Doesn't it follow that static language is not necessarily the best thing invented, if it were there wouldn't be any other kind of languages?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Android, evolvability and Comcast by krzyk on Sunday April 23, 2017 @03:37PM (#14180000)

Yes, but parent response suggested that dynamic langs are the answer to android development problems.

Adding more to the discussion: Android env is like a framework (as opposed to library), it is always harder to work in frameworks than using libraries - e.g. lots of stuff you will have trouble mocking out in unit tests.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Android, evolvability and Comcast by vikeri on Sunday April 23, 2017 @05:19PM (#14180522)

I was just addressing the issues outlined in the post. I would hardly define ClojureScript as a language that came from JavaScript.

Naturally there are cases when a typed language is better than a dynamic one.

[ Parent | on HN ]