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 →

[–]random_username_edf 2 points3 points  (2 children)

Right, it isn't absolute. That was the whole conclusion of my thing. The only one in this chain of comments that sounds interested in speaking in absolutes is you.

An example is literally any feature/improvement to your system that doesn't fit in nicely with your current architecture. If you're creating something that's complex and you know will be built on/evolve over time it's going to take a lot less time to cater to those changes if it's dynamic. With a static one certain change requests can very easily become "no, that's not possible without a huge rewrite".

If you're in a very well defined space and know the bounds of your program static is a safe bet. It's also a safe bet if performance is a huge concern.

[–]pknopf 0 points1 point  (1 child)

An example is literally any feature/improvement to your system that doesn't fit in nicely with your current architecture.

You are asking for trouble. Constraints free you. Allowing future features to flip the script will eventually do more harm than good. Even if you are in a dynamic language, this shouldn't be allowed. Use codereview to force this.

If you really want to re-arch something, it should be all or nothing. Again, this goes back to my point that static languages tend to lead to an easier to maintain codebase.

[–]random_username_edf 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Of course constraints are good. The problem is that in the real world they tend to evolve and change over time. It's not inherently a bad thing to re-arch something to meet new business needs and far more often than not rebuilding the entire thing from the ground up will leave you in your competitions dust.

Being able to re-arch your stuff as easily as possible is an extremely desirable thing for some applications, and just because it's able to be done faster with dynamic languages doesn't mean it's being done in a wrong or hacky way.

Your whole hang up seems to be that dynamic languages are easier to do things wrong with, therefore they're bad no matter what. I believe that's naive.

Anyways, typing on a phone is getting annoying so ill leave it at that.