Explore >> Select a destination
|
You are here 
|
blog.quaddmg.com | ||
| | | | |
boxbase.org
|
|
| | | | | I came up with an idea when studying type theory. I am a vehement proponent of dynamic typing but there are several ideas that require me to explore into type theory so I am studying it. | |
| | | | |
yotam.net
|
|
| | | | | A blog about free software and programming | |
| | | | |
chadaustin.me
|
|
| | | | | This may be the only time I weigh in on the static vs. dynamic typing discussion. Each side has its extreme proponents, and people differ in their ability and desire to work in systems with implicit invariants. Many years ago, back when Java and C++ were the Mainstream Languages and Python was the shiny new up-and-comer, I read Bruce Eckel's arguments in support of dynamically typed languages, and some of the nonobvious (at the time) ways you can get more done at higher quality in a more flexible languag... | |
| | | | |
blog.darklang.com
|
|
| | | And their influence on Dark After two decades of coding professionally in a dozen languages, I've come to a conclusion about static and dynamic types: * Static types help you ensure that your changes work, especially for changes that span large parts of the program. This leads to long-term productivity | ||
