[Quarrelsome]

That's a nice explanation, without any of the bits I disliked from the original post, I appreciate it. :)

Essentially the benefit we're pushing here is cheap decoupling where in static languages you're having to set this kind of arduous plumbing up yourself, aye?

[latch]

Right, with dynamic languages, decoupling is a language feature, not a design decision. It's one of the things that I feel make dynamic languages so much more productive. I work with large Java/C# applications. The loss of productivity due to dealing with traditional dependency handling, both at the implementation and at the test level, is significant.

I'm not going to say that it's as big a leap as automatic garbage collection (because, I don't think it is), but I see similarities between a C++ developer who doesn't understand why Java/C# don't have a malloc and delete method, and a Java/C# developer who doesn't understand why XYZ don't have interfaces nor use DI.

We spend so much time doing something a certain way, that it's hard to see how, given a different context (a new language) what we were trying so hard to avoid in the first place, just works.