I like the fact that interpreting subjectively what 'Dynamic' and 'Static' means for a language, the author is able to pull a rabbit out of his proverbial hat ... except that we see the hole beneath the hat, and the rabbit is a dead rat. Clearly programming in Python vs C++ is a world apart in terms of how 'fast' you can get simple things up and running.
Be that as it may, the tone of the article is clearly written 'looking down' at the readers, and tries to rack up some points by showing 'how smart I am (author) to be able to correct most of you...'.
If he simply described that the definition of the terms, with some examples and then lead into his point to correct the 'popular' assumptions, it would have been a lot better than feeling like you're being lectured from the pulpit on a Sunday morning.
Comments
I like the fact that interpreting subjectively what 'Dynamic' and 'Static' means for a language, the author is able to pull a rabbit out of his proverbial hat ... except that we see the hole beneath the hat, and the rabbit is a dead rat. Clearly programming in Python vs C++ is a world apart in terms of how 'fast' you can get simple things up and running.
The author specifically says C++ is too restricted, and that it makes no distinction between the "class" and "type" the author is talking about.
C++ has no sum types (afaik, the language is so huge I might very well be wrong)
Be that as it may, the tone of the article is clearly written 'looking down' at the readers, and tries to rack up some points by showing 'how smart I am (author) to be able to correct most of you...'. If he simply described that the definition of the terms, with some examples and then lead into his point to correct the 'popular' assumptions, it would have been a lot better than feeling like you're being lectured from the pulpit on a Sunday morning.
C++ (like C) has union, with which you can build tagged unions (aka sum types).