|
|
|
|
|
|
by jondubois
3371 days ago
|
|
|
>> - It requires more planning to do anything > That's the idea. You think about what you're going to write in a strongly typed language rather than just throwing stuff at the wall hoping that something will stick. I think this is a valid point for developers who only have a few years of experience but I've been coding professionally for over a decade now - I don't need the compiler to artificially slow me down - I'd rather spend my mental energy thinking about the algorithm/architecture in its purest form without getting caught up in trying to satisfy the compiler's tedious requirements. For me programming in a typed language is like using software that always asks you "are you sure you want to do this?" every time you tell it to do something. It's OK if you're a beginner, but I just find it frustrating. I spent many years programming in ActionScript 3 and then Java so I feel like I've given typed languages a fair shot. |
|
|
It's slowing you down because you've written code with errors. Those type errors are still in your dynamic code, you just can't see them.
> I spent many years programming in ActionScript 3 and then Java so I feel like I've given typed languages a fair shot.
I don't think you have, you've missed many wonderful modern type system features.
Algebraic types, for one, aren't present in either of those languages and are massively useful, replacing 'null' (with a type like Option/Maybe) and exceptions (with a Result/Either concept) in many languages that have them.
Not to mention, with a language that has type inference, you don't even have to write the type in many cases, and yet you keep the guarantees of a strongly typed language.