Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Language War - Scala versus Python

blog.zlemma.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–52 of 52 posts

Re: Language War - Scala versus Python

#51

Post by igouy »

voidlogic wrote: post #50
fijal wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seriously, computer language shootout is just harmful. Those benchmarks are bad (but it's unclear whether cross-language comparisons can get much better), implementations are worse. And on top of that it does not include opitmized VMs like PyPy or LuaJIT (in fact, it does not include PyPy because we complained at some point).

All benchmarks come with the implicit disclaimer: The best benchmark is always your application. All benchmarks are flawed, use your judgement and determine how flawed a benchmark is; Any flaws are relative to your application similarity to what the benchmark tests. An imperfect tool is not a useless tool, so long as you are smart about how you use it. This is probably relevant too: http://benchmarksgame.alioth.debia…

Those comparison pages come with an explicit wake-up call:

"These are not the only compilers and interpreters. These are not the only programs that could be written. These are not the only tasks that could be solved. These are just 10 tiny examples."

Re: Language War - Scala versus Python

#52

Post by eropple »

stcredzero wrote: post #35
eropple wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I prefer static typing because those assurances reduce the number of things I have to manage--they mean I must keep less state in my head. I do not assume that it guarantees things that it does not. Attributing your coworkers' "if it builds, it works" assumptions to static typing strikes me as incorrect. Static typing, at least in Java, ensures only a (relatively) small set of conditions are true; I don't think you c…

Either way, you end up keeping lots of things in your head. With dynamic langs, you do have to think about types and use them conservatively. With languages like Java -- the same. No toolset is going to work well unless the dev is on top of things and good at using the tool well. I've found that debugging in a dynamic environment is great for managing types in a well architected system. It falls down in a poorly arch…

This is true, but I personally find that the tools available in decent statically/strongly-typed languages--C#, Scala--can do a fair amount in encouraging the Right Thing in ways that dynamically typed languages (especially dynamically weakly typed languages) can't.

I'm even becoming more and more fond of C++ because of the constraints that you can work in with proper use of templates; my only beef there is that the error messages when you do the Wrong Thing are often not conducive to understanding what the Right Thing is.

Post reply on HN