Further to you corollary, I'd note that making something (statically|dynamically) typed is a huge advantage if everything else in your system is going to be (statically|dynamically) typed. This is automatable going in the static->dynamic direction (just insert a bunch of runtime checks at the interfaces), but not necessarily the other way around (possible if the dynamic code happens to have been written in a pretty typey way to begin with - but if it was, then the author should probably have been using a static system in the first place. This is the subject of ongoing research by Smart People).
So, some obvious questions include "Is one style better for any clearly definable problem domain?" and the related "Why do people favour one style over the other?"
I think the first question is much harder to answer, and the second one potentially more interesting :)
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Further to you corollary, I'd note that making something (statically|dynamically) typed is a huge advantage if everything else in your system is going to be (statically|dynamically) typed. This is automatable going in the static->dynamic direction (just insert a bunch of runtime checks at the interfaces), but not necessarily the other way around (possible if the dynamic code happens to have been written in a pretty typey way to begin with - but if it was, then the author should probably have been using a static system in the first place. This is the subject of ongoing research by Smart People).
So, some obvious questions include "Is one style better for any clearly definable problem domain?" and the related "Why do people favour one style over the other?"
I think the first question is much harder to answer, and the second one potentially more interesting :)