Strong typing, a hill I'm willing to die on

Re:Strong typing, a hill I'm willing to die on by mcronce on Wednesday October 04, 2023 @12:21PM (#37767434)

I can't (or, more accurately, don't) believe that, but I can certainly believe they have nothing interesting to say about the topic of static vs dynamic typing.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Strong typing, a hill I'm willing to die on by _a_a_a_ on Wednesday October 04, 2023 @01:57PM (#37769093)

I'm very much with you on static typing but you've closed your mind with a slam. Please don't.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Strong typing, a hill I'm willing to die on by lovich on Wednesday October 04, 2023 @02:15PM (#37769343)

An open mind is like a fortress with its gates unbarred and unguarded.

It is both useful and allowed to have a certain level of belief that won’t be crossed without heavy effort. The OP didn’t even say they were closed to the conversation completely, but that a random person with no pre built trust isn’t going to get the time of day from them to rehash the same settled argument.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Strong typing, a hill I'm willing to die on by _a_a_a_ on Wednesday October 04, 2023 @02:24PM (#37769465)

"Matz or Jose Valim or Van Rossom or the creators of Julia"

from memory Matz -> ruby, Valim-> elixir, Van Rossum -> python, and 'the creators of Julia' -> julia

Not 'random persons' then

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Strong typing, a hill I'm willing to die on by lovich on Wednesday October 04, 2023 @07:37PM (#37773159)

Yea, the OP was referencing randos from his perspective and the responder subbed in famous software developers. They weren’t arguing on the same point

[ Parent | on HN ]