Re:An Object-Oriented Language for the '20s
by stitched2gethr on Saturday March 13, 2021 @12:51PM
(#26448313)
After working in Python and Ruby I don't think I could ever choose a dynamically typed language for a project with more than a few thousand lines. There's just a lot of safety, and documentation, you get cheaply when using static types.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:An Object-Oriented Language for the '20s
by weatherlight on Saturday March 13, 2021 @04:18PM
(#26450089)
Ruby has conventions and a big testing culture which helps mitigate a lot of those issues. I also work with Typescript and I see whole classes of bugs that could be avoided if everyone just stuck with conventions and best practices.
If you like Ruby and wish it had types, check out Crystal. It's basically Ruby with Go's concurrency model, and it's as fast as Go.
{Edit: repetition}
Re:An Object-Oriented Language for the '20s
by fiddlerwoaroof on Saturday March 13, 2021 @01:01PM
(#26448436)
There’s languages like Python and Ruby and then there’s languages like Smalltalk, Common Lisp, Self or Clojure: if dev-time is runtime, you miss compile-time checks a lot less