Comparing the Same Project in Rust, Haskell, C++, Python, Scala and OCaml

Re:Comparing the Same Project in Rust, Haskell, C++, Python,... by galaxyLogic on Saturday June 15, 2019 @11:08PM (#20193610)

My surprise from this study was simply that dynamic languages are clearly not much worse than the best-of-breed statically typed languages. Maybe 20% is within the margin or error, but you definitely can't take that as any evidence that Scala is "better" than Python.

The reason I think this is "big big news" is I thought the general consensus had already been reached in academia if not the programming community that "statically typed functional languages are much better". There's little or no evidence of that in the results of this study.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Comparing the Same Project in Rust, Haskell, C++, Python,... by esarbe on Monday June 17, 2019 @10:12AM (#20203132)

I don't know where you get that. This is about code base size. Dynamically typed languages have always had fewer LOC than statically typed languages.

If there's a surprise, it's that Scala is able to snuggle up to Python so nicely, while being one of most strongly typed languages.

[ Parent | on HN ]