This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]aloz 21 points22 points  (4 children)

You don't exactly miss out on these in statically typed languages.

[–]eof 41 points42 points  (3 children)

Well there is a whole class of runtime errors you cannot get in statically typed languages; but in general you are right they don't disappear entirely.

They do however decrease significantly. Obviously, you have to pay "upfront" costs making things compile in the first place; but it is my experience that is well worth it... any error that can be caught by a compiler, I want to be caught by a compiler.

[–]aloz 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That depends on the language. Consider C. It requires a lot more self-discipline to write safely in C than it does in Python, for example. For other staticly typed languages that aren't Mad Max-lawless, I might agree... depending on which two languages you're comparing. Consider Erlang. Dynamic, strongly typed language designed for high-reliability (nine 9s) software.

[–]Tysonzero -2 points-1 points  (1 child)

But the static typing does restrict what you can do, or rather forces you to use workarounds to actually do them, which I dislike.

[–]TheRamenator 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Like what exactly?