News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Haskell in Production by wellpast on Friday October 18, 2019 @01:02PM (#21293048)
> There is nothing you can do in a dynamic language you can't do in a typed language.

There is nothing one can't do in assembly that you can't do it in a higher-level PL.

The argument is not what one can or can't do.

The argument is that one world (dynamism) allows for higher throughput than a static-checked environment. This can be discussed but the "can do" argument is of no interest.

You "can do" anything given enough time. One doesn't even need a programming language. You can manually execute instructions by hand. But this is not the discussion.

Re:Haskell in Production by mbrodersen on Saturday October 19, 2019 @06:18AM (#21297743)
> The argument is that one world (dynamism) allows for higher throughput than a static-checked environment.

I have programmed in both dynamic languages and typed languages for 35+ years. And I am most definitely more productive using a typed language. Otherwise I wouldn't. So I wonder why our experiences are so different?