[irahul]

> Where do you put the brains on though? In the IDE/programmer or in the language?

Dynamic languages aren't conductive to re-factoring, and static languages are.

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4057593

I don't see how it is a question of where to put the brains.

[gruseom]

Dynamic languages aren't conductive to re-factoring

How come they invented it, then?

http://st-www.cs.illinois.edu/users/brant/Refactory/Refactor...

[irahul]

Let me rephrase. Dynamic languages aren't conductive to a subset of re-factoring - the cases which involve renaming identifiers or changing types throughout the project.

[gruseom]

They invented those too. Indeed they're listed at the link I provided.

It seems strange to argue that what gave rise to a thing isn't "conducive" to it. Actually, it's more than strange, it's a contradiction in terms: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/conducive.