Layering a static type system atop a dynamic one, capable of proving the dynamic checks redundant, combines the flexibility of dynamic typing with the performance of static typing.

Added to korrents 22 Apr 2026 · How quotes work · Something wrong? Tell us

Related korrents

Our reading — they may agree, disagree or merely touch the same thing. Closest first: a shared subject counts for most, then how near the wording is.

• Enforcing safe mutable value semantics (e.g. via borrow-checking) is far easier to do cheaply with a static type system than with a dynamic one. JBJamie Brandon22 Apr 2026similar wordingProgrammer based in Vancouver who writes at…
• Calling static typing the only way to build reliable systems is idiotic in the face of the evidence, starting with Shopify serving a million requests a second on Rails. DHDavid Heinemeier Hansson12 Jul 2025similar wordingCreator of Ruby on Rails, CTO of 37signals
• Ruby must never get static typing: dynamic duck typing is the essence of what makes Ruby Ruby. DHDavid Heinemeier Hansson18 Sept 2024similar wording
• The empirical literature on static typing finds effects too small to matter, in the narrow settings it has managed to study. DLDan Luu7 Nov 2014similar wordingProgrammer who has worked on hardware verification at Centaur
• People adopted TypeScript for the tooling, not the types: an erasable type system is worth having because of the productivity the tooling built on it delivers. AHAnders Hejlsberg13 May 2026similar wordingDanish software engineer and Microsoft technical fellow

On the map

Open the map on its own page →