From: Wilkes Joiner <boognish23@...>
Date: 2001-12-11T01:56:08+09:00
Subject: [ruby-talk:28104] Re: The benefits of dynamic typing?

Hi,

--- Roy Patrick Tan <rtan@vt.edu> wrote:
> given the advantages of a statically typed
> language, does dynamic typing offer any benefits?
> What is the reason behind ruby's dynamically 
> typed variables?


Spending most of my development time in Java, and
having spent a considerable amount of time in
dynamicly typed languages like Python, Smalltalk, and
Ruby, I've found that statically typed languages just
get in my way.  I personally think that the safety
benefits are a myth, or at the very least overrated. 
Just look at the collection hierarchy in Java2.  

Iterator iter = someList.iterator();
while (iter.hasNext()) {
    MyType o = (MyType) o.next();
    o.doSumphin();
    // or even uglier
    ((MyType)o.next()).doSumphin();

}

All of this type checking is done at runtime, and the
code is just plain hideous to look at, which does
matter to me.  If I want to do anything as general as
a collection, I have to pass Object around, then cast
to the appropriate type as needed.  It appears to me
that I lose the benefits of compile time type
checking.  

This really gets in my way when I start coding then
realize a few months later that I could generalize
what I've been working on, but I have to go change all
of my c lass's clients to reflect the more general
type that I had failed to realize the first time I
wrote the code.  This may reflect on my poor
understanding of the task at hand, but I like think of
developing a system as a learning process.  As the
system grows and takes shape, my understanding grows
with it.  The flexibility of a dynamic language seems
to suite this style of development better than a more
static language.  


- Wilkes Joiner



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send your FREE holiday greetings online!
http://greetings.yahoo.com