[dvo]

I've made language choices on quite a few projects. To be honest, I've never specifically evaluated static vs. dynamic typing as one of the major factors in the decision, and I've never seen static vs. dynamic typing become a major point of debate. The discussion typically revolves around pragmatic issues related to existing standards, compatibility with existing software, skills of the team, availability of programmers, etc...

Do you really think the use of dynamically typed languages is an important enough factor to require justification? I don't want to imply that the distinction isn't significant. I'm sure it is. I just haven't had any experiences where it came into play when making a language choice, and I'm curious whether you can elaborate on the need for justification.

[laureny]

> Do you really think the use of dynamically typed languages is an important enough factor to require justification?

Yes, because when you pick a dynamically typed language, you are giving up on important advantages that become crucial as your code base grows, among which:

- Type annotations, which make it easier for newcomers to understand the existing code base (and obviously, catching early errors by the compiler).

- Automatic refactorings, which guarantee that your technical debt remains at a reasonable level since it's so easy to evolve your code base as it grows. Even the simplest refactorings require human supervision in dynamically typed languages (here is a good explanation why: http://goo.gl/SKaos )

[ridiculous_fish]

Those are consequences of not having static types; they are not consequences of having dynamic types. I have to stick up for ObjC, which has dynamic types, but enjoys the advantages you listed because it also has static types.