Carmack about static analysis

[deadalnix]

Le 10/02/2012 05:37, Walter Bright a écrit :
> On 2/9/2012 12:09 PM, Bruno Medeiros wrote:
>> Nice article! I particularly liked this comment:
>> "The classic hacker disdain for “bondage and discipline languages” is
>> short
>> sighted – the needs of large, long-lived, multi-programmer projects
>> are just
>> different than the quick work you do for yourself."
>
> I implicitly agree with you. But people have written large programs in
> dynamic languages, and claim it works out equivalently for them. I don't
> have enough experience in that direction to decide if that's baloney or
> not.

Well I did that. The language doesn't replace programmer discipline and 
skills. Or, to say thing another way : the programmer is more important 
than the language.

But it is clear that successful code in non typed languages ends up 
beeign typed anyway, just based on discipline, in most of the code.

Typeless is great when sketching some piece of code, but you'll way more 
problem at the end.