|
|
|
|
|
by OutOfHere
35 days ago
|
|
The culture issue is unfixable. Python attracts good engineers but it overwhelmingly also attracts bad engineers who don't give a rat's azz about code comprehension and maintainability. These engineers last long enough to get a new job elsewhere, and the ones left are holding the bag. Type-enforced languages seem to avoid this problem. I am willing to bet that type-enforced languages have a lower rate of failed projects that last less than four years. |
|
> Type-enforced languages seem to avoid this problem.
Right, we all know how typescript projects are known for their longevity and we all know that people working in typescript are doing it because of their exceptional care about the craft and concern about maintainability. It has nothing to do with employability or the fact that startups:
- favor agility and time-to-market over long-term maintainability (i.e, they accrue a lot of technical debt)
- are more budget constrained and less likely to have enough resources to focus on cultivating good engineering discipline.
- have to compete with everyone else to attact talent in the labor pool and can not all afford to choose a tech stack that is less popular.
- will have a wild variance in the quality of the average developer.
No, sir. None of this really is really important to understand why startup teams have crappy code. It's all about the choice of statically- vs dynamically-typed languages.