Re:The Applied Theory of writing bug-free code
by snprbob86 on Saturday October 10, 2009 @03:51PM
(#873740)
I've written a lot of Java, C++, and C#. I currently write a lot of MSBuild (not by choice) and Python. Static vs dynamic typing is neither a mutually exclusive choice, nor a choice which can occur in a vacuum. Use the right tool for the job, or else one of these things will happen:
Java/Swing: You will be woefully unequipped for the natural cascading property nature of GUI applications; forcing you to jump through giant hoops to get anything to not look awful.
C++/COM: You'll cast IUnknown to ISomethingElse so many times that it will lose meaning.
MSBuild: You will make a typo in a parameter name, but won't find out until two hours into your build when you get an error that could have been caught by a compiler.
--
Static typing works for problems that demand rigor, but may be hard to unit test. That includes most larger projects worked on by companies of overworked and slightly disinterested developers.
Dynamic typing works when you can iterate as fast as you can refresh the browser, or when your application is small enough that it is reasonable to full text search the entire thing anytime you refactor anything.
You can build dynamic type systems on top of static ones, but it is ugly. Don't be WPF's DependencyObject system cringe. It is safe, however, to layer dynamic code above static code. Feel free to use a dynamic language for scripting a statically build application.
You can build static type systems on top of dynamic ones, but they will leak. It is also awkward to layer static code above dynamic code. Odds are your code will be dynamic, but more verbose because of the type system getting in your way.
Java/Swing: You will be woefully unequipped for the natural cascading property nature of GUI applications; forcing you to jump through giant hoops to get anything to not look awful.
C++/COM: You'll cast IUnknown to ISomethingElse so many times that it will lose meaning.
MSBuild: You will make a typo in a parameter name, but won't find out until two hours into your build when you get an error that could have been caught by a compiler.
--
Static typing works for problems that demand rigor, but may be hard to unit test. That includes most larger projects worked on by companies of overworked and slightly disinterested developers.
Dynamic typing works when you can iterate as fast as you can refresh the browser, or when your application is small enough that it is reasonable to full text search the entire thing anytime you refactor anything.
You can build dynamic type systems on top of static ones, but it is ugly. Don't be WPF's DependencyObject system cringe. It is safe, however, to layer dynamic code above static code. Feel free to use a dynamic language for scripting a statically build application.
You can build static type systems on top of dynamic ones, but they will leak. It is also awkward to layer static code above dynamic code. Odds are your code will be dynamic, but more verbose because of the type system getting in your way.