There's essentially no research investment in dynamic typing, for many reasons. That lack of investment is going to hurt in the medium to long term, as all the advanced tools and techinques will assume program type information is available.
What are the specific features from dynamically typed languages that you would want to see in a statically typed program. The standard argument is "ease of use", but programs in modern static languages tend to be as easy/terse/short. You can express the same ideas in both languages, except static languages provide more information. So, what feature of dynamic languages, that is incredibly helpful to you every day, will you miss when you switch to a modern static language?
Comments
Recommended reading if this kind of thing interests you: http://www.vpri.org/pdf/tr2011004_steps11.pdf
You had me until "Dynamic typing will come to be perceived as a quaint, bizarre evolutionary dead-end in the history of programming."
There's essentially no research investment in dynamic typing, for many reasons. That lack of investment is going to hurt in the medium to long term, as all the advanced tools and techinques will assume program type information is available.
It is a little hard to read because of this bias -- but some of the ideas presented are still compelling.
What are the specific features from dynamically typed languages that you would want to see in a statically typed program. The standard argument is "ease of use", but programs in modern static languages tend to be as easy/terse/short. You can express the same ideas in both languages, except static languages provide more information. So, what feature of dynamic languages, that is incredibly helpful to you every day, will you miss when you switch to a modern static language?