←back to thread

Software development topics I've changed my mind on

(chriskiehl.com)
873 points belter | 2 comments | 05 Feb 25 09:50 UTC | HN request time: 0.489s | source
Show context
Kototama ◴[05 Feb 25 11:24 UTC] No.42947000[source]▶
> Typed languages are essential on teams with mixed experience levels

I like this one because it puts this endless dilemma in a human context. Most discussions are technical (static typing ease refactoring and safety, dynamic typing is easier to learn and better for interactive programming etc.) and ignore the users, the programmers.

replies(5): >>42947041 #>>42947190 #>>42947740 #>>42948492 #>>42952947 #
wesselbindt ◴[05 Feb 25 13:53 UTC] No.42948492[source]▶
I'm kind of wondering where the "mixed experience levels" part comes from. What is it about more homogeneously skilled teams that makes them less susceptible to the productivity boost that statically typed languages give in large code bases?
replies(4): >>42948623 #>>42949682 #>>42949734 #>>42949852 #
1. Cthulhu_ ◴[05 Feb 25 14:05 UTC] No.42948623[source]▶
I'm reading in it that experienced developers (be it overall or in a specific codebase) "know" all the ins and outs, types, conventions etc, whereas less experienced people cannot yet know all of that; being able to lean on good types and / or other types of automated checks helps them make more confident changes.
replies(1): >>42948822 #
2. naasking ◴[05 Feb 25 14:22 UTC] No.42948822[source]▶
Less experienced devs iterate on something until it looks like it works, not realizing the footguns they may have embedded. Static typing removes some footguns and provides documentation for the next unfortunate soul to look at this code.