Why Static Typing Came Back • Richard Feldman • GOTO 2022
GOTO Conferences2 HN recommenders · recommended in 2 months, 2023-2024
157K views · 3 years ago · talk · evergreen
Richard Feldman's GOTO Copenhagen 2022 talk on why dynamic languages like Python, Ruby, PHP and JavaScript rose in the 1990s and why each now has a popular static type checker. It argues that modern static typing recovers the advantages that made dynamic languages attractive.
HN commenters cite it as a clear account of the trade-offs between static and dynamic typing and why the industry is swinging back to types.
1:14:52Effective Programs - 10 Years of Clojure - Rich Hickey
ClojureTV
176K views • 9 years ago
1:58:46Dynamic Languages Wizards Series - Panel on Language Design
Eduardo Cavazos
16K views • 14 years ago
1:03:31Brian Goetz - Stewardship: the Sobering Parts
ClojureTV
39K views • 11 years ago
54:31Does APL Need a Type System? by Aaron W Hsu at #FnConf18
ConfEngine
6K views • 7 years ago
1:12:10Practical Common Lisp
Google TechTalks
98K views • 19 years ago
46:09Why Isn't Functional Programming the Norm? – Richard Feldman
Metosin
1.6M views • 7 years ago
1:14:32Building Your Own Dynamic Language
Stanford
21K views • 18 years ago
59:04On the Expressive Power of Programming Languages by Shriram Krishnamurthi [PWLConf 2019]
PapersWeLove
27K views • 7 years ago
39:40"Type-Driven Program Synthesis" by Nadia Polikarpova
Strange Loop Conference
15K views • 8 years ago
12:31OSCON 2010: Rob Pike, "Public Static Void"
O'Reilly
119K views • 16 years ago
1:06:46Crockford on JavaScript - Section 8: Programming Style & Your Brain
YUI Library
111K views • 14 years ago
43:14Anders Hejlsberg and Lars Bak: TypeScript, JavaScript, and Dart
DartlangTV
14K views • 13 years ago
56:55Q&A with Guido van Rossum, Inventor of Python
Microsoft Reactor
28K views • 5 years ago
1:12:122017 ACM PPoPP Keynote: It's Time for a New Old Language
Guy Steele
7K views • 9 years ago
1:42:09Crockford on JavaScript - Volume 1: The Early Years
YUI Library
252K views • 15 years ago
1:03:29Maybe Not - Rich Hickey
ClojureTV
181K views • 7 years ago
1:07:22Invited Talk - Guy Steele
ClojureTV
39K views • 9 years ago
40:56"Liberating the Smalltalk lurking in C and Unix" by Stephen Kell
Strange Loop Conference
25K views • 12 years ago
42:44Armin Ronacher - A Python for Future Generations
EuroPython Conference
6K views • 9 years ago
1:03:48JavaScript: The Good Parts
Google TechTalks
589K views • 17 years ago
4 comments from Hacker News
I believe Dart was originally gradually typed, and then abandoned the gradual typing for strict-typing-by-default? That doesn't quite sound properly type-safe to me although still safer than how Javascript is by default. My only reference is a memory of this talk by Richard Feldman but I might be wrong or misremembering. ▶ this video
Yeah, Rich Feldman has a good talk on this, entitled Why Static Typing Came Back[1]. It makes a good argument that static typing can recover most of the advantages traditionally accounted to dynamic typing. Rapid iteration you can get from incremental compilers, being concise you can get from powerful type inference, etc. Conversely, the advantages of static typing (largely boiling down to increased reliability) cannot easily be captured by dynamically typed languages. Gradual typing, particularly successful by TypeScript, might be an interesting middle ground, or it might just be a reflection of the dynamic history of JS. [1]: ▶ this video
I saw a talk that touched on this recently: ▶ this video He explains that dynamically-typed languages like Python, Ruby, and JS became popular in the 90s because they offered a fast feedback loop for website building, and they didn't need an IDE or compilers, which were slow (and often not free). It ended up not being worth trading your development time for the performance increase when all your users were connecting via 56k modem anyway. The talk makes a lot of other cool points about how development has changed in the past decade or two, and why the trend is moving back to static typing.
I think the suitable followup to this is the Richard Feldman talk, "Why Static Typing Came Back."[1] It gives the major reasons why one would prefer one over the other, and makes the case that static types can provide most of the actual benefits of dynamic languages, but the reverse is not true. [1]: ▶ this video