On Tuesday, 15 October 2013 at 22:31:06 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
Am 16.10.2013 00:15, schrieb Walter Bright:
http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/1oi8wd/ruby_is_a_dying_language/ccs8yr8
Agree.
While I do like dynamic languages for prototyping and small
applications, I came to the conclusion they don't scale in the
enterprise.
(...)
Haven't tried Ruby, but I switched from Python to D because of
static typing and speed back in 2007.
Why on earth should
someVariable = 1
# And then in some seldom-executed branch..
somevariable = 2
give me hard to track bugs?
Even lua requires you to say "I'm creating a *new* variable now".
And a compiler that doesn't do simple optimizations?
for x in range(0,10):
i = x*x
# do something with i
^ - might be painfully slow. You should of course code like a
compiler and create i outside the loop!
And no types means I have to read the source for every method to
see what types it actually expects.
Dynamic typing does not mean you don't have types to care about,
it just means the types are hidden from sight and cause bugs at
runtime. I will never again code in a dynamic language if I can
avoid it. All the "advantages" of dynamic typing simply doesn't
exist for anything other than small/trivial programs in my
experience.
No.. Give me a language that catches obvious bugs at
compile-time, makes code self-documenting and doesn't let me
worry about performance.
Of course.. It might just be that I don't "get" dynamic typing :)
