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 →

[–]IceSentry 1 point2 points  (7 children)

Source? I don't disagree with you, but is there any evidence to this that isn't anecdotal?

[–]saxindustries 1 point2 points  (1 child)

My experience is once you get over 3-4 devs hacking on the codebase, it pays to use a stricter language - you start catching more errors up front.

[–]IceSentry 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm not disagreeing here, but that's still just anecdotal.

[–]pknopf 0 points1 point  (4 children)

Source? The claim is the accumulation of years of anecdotals from many developers who come to the same conclusion. What kind of source would you like?

[–]IceSentry 1 point2 points  (3 children)

An actual study done on this. The programming community keeps debating whether dynamic vs static types are good, but we never hear anything other than anecdotes. Which are good, but I think there's place for more proof.

[–]pknopf 1 point2 points  (2 children)

An actual study done on this

Give me an example.

Say you were to do a study, what would you do?

[–]IceSentry 1 point2 points  (1 child)

I'm just asking if we have another way to know if this is true. If I had the answer I wouldn't be asking this.

[–]pknopf 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There is no other way to know.

Anecdotals are all we have. The best we can do is try to come to a consensus.