> Yes, and this is where statically typed languages shine (in my opinion).
Indeed. This feels like a just-before-the-moment-of-realization situation.
The endless cycle between "more dynamic" and "more static" continues it seems.
I wonder if there is any correlation between experience in the field and static vs. dynamic vs. "fail fast dynamic".
(I'd say Erlang falls in the latter category and it has a pretty good track record for reliability, but so does Python. It's an imperfect axis for sure.)
Indeed. This feels like a just-before-the-moment-of-realization situation.
The endless cycle between "more dynamic" and "more static" continues it seems.
I wonder if there is any correlation between experience in the field and static vs. dynamic vs. "fail fast dynamic".
(I'd say Erlang falls in the latter category and it has a pretty good track record for reliability, but so does Python. It's an imperfect axis for sure.)