Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!aioe.org!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Gene Wirchenko Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer Subject: Re: in praise of type checking Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2011 19:12:07 -0700 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 23 Message-ID: <5pt997dslap69jgfaor9kpb0pafo52puhv@4ax.com> References: <9f6hhqF717U1@mid.individual.net> <82lu87t4e47t1256r1vh7ich0esreter46@4ax.com> <9fb3m5F79oU1@mid.individual.net> <19264117.413.1318091736115.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@prib32> <9fi3kpFt0eU1@mid.individual.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Info: mx04.eternal-september.org; posting-host="7Qrvczazr82YckO5XW8Vtw"; logging-data="2109"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+hbGhDLGB4n9D60l71sGbpswjodwyeymw=" X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 4.2/32.1118 Cancel-Lock: sha1:lD24FRO3rUhob0UDvOY34iVNDkY= Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.java.programmer:8730 On Wed, 12 Oct 2011 01:49:46 +0100, Patricia Shanahan wrote: >Arved Sandstrom wrote: >... >> As Gene said (and I happen to agree with), there is no one optimum. >> One guy in one situation will see that dynamic typing suits his >> purposes better than static typing (or at least he thinks it does), >> and another guy in another situation thinks that static typing is >> better than dynamic typing (and he in turn may have good reasons, >> adequate reasons, or lousy reasons for believing so). >... > >It does not even have to be different people. Some tasks seem easier to >me in a dynamically typed language, others with static typing. Quite. I prefer static, because I like to catch the trouble up front. This is at a cost of flexibility, and sometimes, I want/need that flexibility. Sincerely, Gene Wrichenko