Moving from static language to dynamic

Question

There are a lot of discussions all over the internet and on SO, i.e. here and here, about static vs dynamic languages.

I\'m not going to ask again about one vs anoth

Answer 1

Nice question.

I am now working in Ruby, PHP and ActionScript (the least dynamic of the three) instead of languages that I would prefer, like Java and C#. But beggars, I mean, workers in this economy, can't be choosers. Or rather, you have to choose your battles and your master.

It's hard to compare Ruby and Java because they've got more than one difference, and you only asked about the dynamic/static thing (and not even about the strongly vs. weakly-typed thing!). But on that front, what affects me most is always the IDE. I was always horrified when other Java programmers used Notepad or Textpad to write code, and nowadays there are just too many advantages of a good IDE for that madness. Not true with Ruby! I use Netbeans and it does really well, but one of the main differences is that I have to actually type code. Autocomplete, for me, was/is a way of life (I write SMS messages in full English/Spanish with the predictive dictionary, for instance, and never use abbreviations) and writing Ruby code does require more work.

So at first it was painful and I was constantly looking at, for instance, function names of classes that I had written (or that are part of Ruby) just to get the spelling right! So that sucked, I thought, and I continued to think that until...

I moved back to ActionScript the other day, and to get my IDE autocompleting (FlashDevelop or FlexBuilder) I declare all variables with types (strongly-typed by choice, if you will)... and suddenly I thought what a friggin' hassle!

And then today I had to do some feature additions on a Ruby project and it felt free and cool. The code is clean, and why would I be informing the IDE of what I'm trying to write anyway?

So I would say that 1) the biggest challenges are learning the language and the framework you're working in, like always 2) it's been amazingly fun and deeply eye-opening. New languages always carry new things with them, but dynamic languages just feel different. And that's just the kind of thing that gets you to wake up at 7am and do some coding on a Sunday morning before falling asleep again.

I like programming and like most of you, I've spent some time with stored procedures, XSL, static, dynamic, whatever... it's all fun, and they all feel totally different. In the end, the framework you are working in will be the thing that will convince you too stay or not (if you have a choice), I think, but languages are to learned, studied and experienced, not compared.

Answer 2

Was that easy?

Moderately. Some Java-isms are hard habits to break. My first six months, I wrote Python with ;'s. Icky. Once I was over it, though, I haven't looked back.

What was the biggest advantage?

Moving from the "write -> compile -> build -> run -> break -> debug -> write" cycle to a "write -> run -> break -> write" cycle. It takes time to get used to immediate gratification from the Python command-line interpreter. I was soooo used to endless design and planning before attempting to write (much less compile) any code.

At first I considered the python command line to be a kind of "education-only" interface. Then reading docstrings, doctests, and user guides where the application is being typed at the >>> prompt, I started to realize that the truly great Python software boils complexity and nuance down to stuff you can type interactively.

[I wish I could design stuff that worked that cleanly.]

What was the biggest challenge?

Multiple inheritance. I use it very rarely.

Was it fun?

So far.

It's also amazingly productive. More time with user requirements and real data. Less time planning an inheritance hierarchy with proper interfaces to capture meaning and compile correctly and be extensible enough to last at least to the next revision.

Answer 3

I'm also interested in this topic. Tried do dive into Ruby and Rails a while ago, and it really helped me to grasp the ASP.Net MVC stuff, which i think is a bit too chalenging at first for average .net developer.

If you're interested more on moving in this direction, or curious about how some developers moved from static to dynamic languages as their full time jobs, i highly recommend this Alt.Net podcast.

Answer 4

I can't qualify myself fully under that handle but I did spend a while writing some an interesting Python mini-game after having spent many years writing Java. So, I might be mixing a little bit of moving from compiled to interpreted along with it.

I found myself using notation to mimic static typing. :)

However, I did find myself cranking code out at a slightly better clip. Having an interpreter is a godsend as far as learning new language/writing new code. The shorter the time between finishing a line of code and seeing it work, the faster you can write, and I think that is probably the best thing most dynamic and interpreted languages.

My code didn't look too different, all things considered. Though, Python has a lot of fun data structures. :)

Answer 5

If I were you, I would try Scala!!!.

Scala has some aspects really interesting that lets you feel like doing dynamic, while doing static.

• Scala is a statically typed language with dynamic typed smell, because the compiler makes you less repetitive inferring your assignments.

• A compiled language with a warm and wonderful script flavor.Cause you can use the scala console, or even write scripts just like ruby or python. So you can choose between "write -> compile -> build -> run -> break -> debug -> write" or "write -> run -> break -> write" as S.Lott said.

• Scala is a complete Functional language with full support for OO. So you don't lose many important OO aspects like inheritance, encapsulation, polymorphism, etc.

Why answering you questions suggesting Scala? Because I tryed script languages before, and the main was Ruby. And it was just like S.Lott said. But not so easy for me and my team. Most of time static is safe, less error prone, and even faster if you have the right language.

Answering you three questions putting Scala inside we have:

Was that easy?

Yes. Sometimes you need to concentrate to leave you old concepts aside and go deep.

What was the biggest advantage?

You feel in home cause you don't need to change you environment or rewrite existing applications to migrate to Scala (talking about Java). If you come from Java, you can start playing with Scala after reading some articles. Not too much effort. Another important advantage is the use of a functional language en its embedded power.

Was it fun?

Sure! Changing your mind, changing your way to solve problems to the best is for sure funny.

This is my vision. You don't exactly need to leave off static to grab the advantage of dynamic.