Re:Strong typing, a hill I'm willing to die on
by ReflectedImage on Friday October 06, 2023 @03:06PM
(#37794843)
Dynamically typed programs can be structured in far better ways than statically typed programs.
>Both programs have the same underlying structure No they don't, this is just a massive gap in your knowledge.
> try refactoring Python code without type hints in a large code base
I've done that on multiple occasions, the test suite is fine, thank you very much.
Re:Strong typing, a hill I'm willing to die on
by freilanzer on Monday October 09, 2023 @05:42AM
(#37818668)
> Dynamically typed programs can be structured in far better ways than statically typed programs.
That's simply not true.
> No they don't, this is just a massive gap in your knowledge.
Based on your responses here I don't think you really know what you are talking about.
> I've done that on multiple occasions, the test suite is fine, thank you very much.
Well, if you say so.
That just makes no sense. Both programs have the same underlying structure, but it's hidden in dynamic languages. Having no compiler and type system makes reasoning much more difficult, there is no discussion about that.
> The larger the program you write with static typing, the worse it becomes compared to it's dynamically typed counterpart.
Again, that's just not the case: try refactoring Python code without type hints in a large code base. It takes a lot more time and effort and you can never be sure you caught all the cases affected by changes. The compiler tells you about every change needed to be made to arrive at a working state.