|
|
|
|
|
by praptak
1869 days ago
|
|
My experience with dynamic types comes from developing in Python. The projects I've seen were pretty healthy until a large enough part of the original team went away. Once enough people had to figure out their way by experimenting, the projects got messy. I'm not saying this doesn't happen in Java or Go but the static typing enables easier code exploration. That makes code bases more readable to newcomers. |
|
A sort of enforced distinction between (typed) interface and implementation.
In practice I always wound up needing to read code of functions to see what types (or keyword argument!) they expected.