Soooo... static typing enthusiasts are conservative, right?Yup, I can relate to that. By that measure, I'm a programming liberal – I love dynamic typing, and feel constrained every time I program in a statically-typed language. And I know lots of programmers who would instantly agree with the “conservative view” Steve outlines above. It's an interesting thought that an entire suite of preferences goes along with your “programming liberal” or “programming conservative” world view. On quick examination, I'd say there's definitely some truth to the notion.
Why yes. Yes, they are. Static typing is unquestionably one of the key dividing software-political issues of our time. And static typing is a hallmark of the conservative world-view.
In the conservative view, static typing (whether explicit or inferred) is taken on faith as an absolute necessity for modern software engineering. It is not something that one questions. It is a non-issue: a cornerstone of what constitutes the very definition of Acceptable Engineering Practice.
In the liberal's view, static typing is analogous to Security Theater. It exists solely to make people feel safe. People (and airports) have proven time and again that you can be just as statistically secure without it. But some people need it in order to feel "safe enough".
That's a pretty big difference of opinion -- one I'm sure you can relate to, regardless of how you feel about it.
Steve looks at the question of whether there's a correlation between one's politics and one's programming politics. He guesses “no”, but on intuition rather than any actual examination. My own politics are hard to shoehorn into any category other than “not liberal” – I wonder if the same is true of my programming politics? To figure that out, we'd have to have a much longer list of the liberal/conservative programming politics divide...
No comments:
Post a Comment