Static vs Dynamic, vol. 923
The recurring static vs. dynamic language hullabaloo rises once again...
Steve Yegge: Dynamic Languages Strike Back.
And, of course, countless comments and blog posts in every direction ensue.
My opinion?
C and C++ are the languages with which we construct not only applications, not only operating systems but also what are generally referred to as "dynamic languages."
Ergo, if a fast static language isn't cutting it for you, it's not against the law to roll your own dynamic extensions. They may be slower, true, but it seems that's the piper's price.
That said, it's a bit more difficult to begin with a dynamic language and augment it with static extensions that run faster than that with which you started.
Steve Yegge: Dynamic Languages Strike Back.
And, of course, countless comments and blog posts in every direction ensue.
My opinion?
C and C++ are the languages with which we construct not only applications, not only operating systems but also what are generally referred to as "dynamic languages."
Ergo, if a fast static language isn't cutting it for you, it's not against the law to roll your own dynamic extensions. They may be slower, true, but it seems that's the piper's price.
That said, it's a bit more difficult to begin with a dynamic language and augment it with static extensions that run faster than that with which you started.
posted by metamerist at
8:23 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home