News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:State of Clojure Survey 2019 Analysis by purple_ducks on Wednesday February 06, 2019 @03:09PM (#19099302)
Given the huge uptake on Typescript, I don't think using JS as an example makes sense.

Static typing helps. It doesn't have to be Java-esque. F# & friends have really nice static type systems where you don't need to declare types for most things - they're automatically inferred.

Re:State of Clojure Survey 2019 Analysis by michaelmrose on Wednesday February 06, 2019 @03:33PM (#19099576)
Seems like javascript is destined to be here for the long haul despite the presence of typescript. In fact static type proponents have been predicting the death of dynamic type languages since this gulf became apparent. Thus far reports of one camps deaths have been greatly exaggerated by the other.
Re:State of Clojure Survey 2019 Analysis by munificent on Wednesday February 06, 2019 @05:29PM (#19100762)
No one is arguing that dynamically typed languages are all going to die out (though CoffeeScript and Perl certainly aren't doing well). Languages almost never die. People are still writing COBOL.

But the relative share of programmers writing code in statically typed languages appears to be increasing. When the web got big, there was a very rapid growth in dynamically typed scripting languages: Perl, Python, Ruby, etc. Then, when client side web development became a thing, JS got huge and then CoffeeScript.

In the past decade or so as developers have moved to writing larger more performance-intensive client-side applications (read: mobile with touch UIs running at 60 FPS), there is now a turn back towards static typing: TypeScript, Kotlin, Swift, etc.

Also, the sophistication of static type systems is increasing. Generics are now a given, control over variance is increasingly common, as is static control over null references.

This doesn't mean the graph will go towards static types forever, but it certainly appears to be right now.

Re:State of Clojure Survey 2019 Analysis by puredanger on Wednesday February 06, 2019 @05:43PM (#19100888)
Pendulums swing....
Re:State of Clojure Survey 2019 Analysis by hota_mazi on Thursday February 07, 2019 @02:03PM (#19107509)
That's a false analogy.

CD's are not going to become popular again to listen to music because "pendulums swing".

When a trend is clearly going toward increased comfort or clear progress, there is only one direction that the trend is going.

I argue that statically typed languages are headed in that direction and that in ten, twenty years from now, dynamically typed languages will be looked at as "something that seemed like a good idea at the time".

Re:State of Clojure Survey 2019 Analysis by puredanger on Thursday February 07, 2019 @03:02PM (#19108033)
"Increased comfort" and "clear progress" are subjective measures about which people may disagree (to whit, I disagree).

I argue that in ten or twenty years from now, we will have great tools in dynamic languages to express constraints when needed, without requiring proofs.

These are opinions, not facts.

Re:State of Clojure Survey 2019 Analysis by purple_ducks on Thursday February 07, 2019 @03:30PM (#19108282)
Is there anything to capture (dev-)runtime data & generate specs from that as a starting point?
Re:State of Clojure Survey 2019 Analysis by puredanger on Friday February 08, 2019 @12:42PM (#19116714)
Re:State of Clojure Survey 2019 Analysis by purple_ducks on Friday February 08, 2019 @04:17PM (#19118766)
super. thanks
Re:State of Clojure Survey 2019 Analysis by michaelmrose on Thursday February 07, 2019 @12:44AM (#19103296)
the poster I originally applied to was arguing exactly that dynamically typed languages were going to die out.

"Clojure's life time was limited from day one because it's simply going against the trend."