Comments on: Java/Ruby does not generalise to static/dynamic http://blog.tmorris.net/javaruby-does-not-generalise-to-staticdynamic/ The weblog of Tony Morris Sat, 19 May 2012 02:52:56 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6 By: Tony Morris http://blog.tmorris.net/javaruby-does-not-generalise-to-staticdynamic/#comment-20155 Tony Morris Wed, 22 Oct 2008 04:12:53 +0000 http://blog.tmorris.net/?p=384#comment-20155 Hi Marvin, Yes this is a well established fact (known as the Turing Halting Problem). It is also mentioned in "What to Know Before Debating Type Systems" if I remember rightly. Hi Marvin,
Yes this is a well established fact (known as the Turing Halting Problem). It is also mentioned in “What to Know Before Debating Type Systems” if I remember rightly.

]]> By: Marvin http://blog.tmorris.net/javaruby-does-not-generalise-to-staticdynamic/#comment-20146 Marvin Wed, 22 Oct 2008 01:34:07 +0000 http://blog.tmorris.net/?p=384#comment-20146 An excellent and interesting reference. I found this point interesting after some of your diatribes (well, that's excessive) of scala's misbehaviors: > Furthermore, there is an ironclad mathematical proof that a > type checker of any interest at all is always conservative. > Building a type checker that doesn't reject any correct > programs isn't just difficult; it's impossible. An excellent and interesting reference. I found this point interesting after some of your diatribes (well, that’s excessive) of scala’s misbehaviors:

> Furthermore, there is an ironclad mathematical proof that a
> type checker of any interest at all is always conservative.
> Building a type checker that doesn’t reject any correct
> programs isn’t just difficult; it’s impossible.

]]> By: Fogus http://blog.tmorris.net/javaruby-does-not-generalise-to-staticdynamic/#comment-19984 Fogus Mon, 20 Oct 2008 20:01:11 +0000 http://blog.tmorris.net/?p=384#comment-19984 "static typing and explicit type annotating are two very different things" This is a key statement, and I have been looking for a way to express this exact sentiment during my own discussions on static vs. dynamic. I hope you don't mind if I steal it. -m “static typing and explicit type annotating are two very different things”

This is a key statement, and I have been looking for a way to express this exact sentiment during my own discussions on static vs. dynamic. I hope you don’t mind if I steal it.
-m

]]> By: orochi http://blog.tmorris.net/javaruby-does-not-generalise-to-staticdynamic/#comment-19584 orochi Thu, 16 Oct 2008 16:29:40 +0000 http://blog.tmorris.net/?p=384#comment-19584 > should you desire to seek it, just drop me a line It could be nice if you dedicated a blog post to the resources which you are aware of like the C. Smith article. Thanks for the link. > should you desire to seek it, just drop me a line

It could be nice if you dedicated a blog post to the resources which you are aware of like the C. Smith article. Thanks for the link.

]]> By: mein Blog » Blog Archive » Typ Systeme http://blog.tmorris.net/javaruby-does-not-generalise-to-staticdynamic/#comment-19580 mein Blog » Blog Archive » Typ Systeme Thu, 16 Oct 2008 15:56:47 +0000 http://blog.tmorris.net/?p=384#comment-19580 [...] Wie schön er sich doch aufregen kann: link [...] [...] Wie schön er sich doch aufregen kann: link [...]

]]> By: Germán http://blog.tmorris.net/javaruby-does-not-generalise-to-staticdynamic/#comment-19578 Germán Thu, 16 Oct 2008 15:30:41 +0000 http://blog.tmorris.net/?p=384#comment-19578 Mark, I think what he means there is that dynamic type system doesn't necessarily imply shorter code, the reason being that a static type system language can have type inference and there are other factors, apart from the type system, that can make code shorter or longer (like syntax sugar and functional idioms). This is beyond the point of whether "Ruby is shorter than Java or not". Mark,
I think what he means there is that dynamic type system doesn’t necessarily imply shorter code, the reason being that a static type system language can have type inference and there are other factors, apart from the type system, that can make code shorter or longer (like syntax sugar and functional idioms). This is beyond the point of whether “Ruby is shorter than Java or not”.

]]> By: GTAStud http://blog.tmorris.net/javaruby-does-not-generalise-to-staticdynamic/#comment-19577 GTAStud Thu, 16 Oct 2008 15:06:08 +0000 http://blog.tmorris.net/?p=384#comment-19577 I couldn't agree more with you on what constitutes shorter code. Especially when you start to include libraries... I couldn’t agree more with you on what constitutes shorter code. Especially when you start to include libraries…

]]> By: Static vs dynamic still isn’t about typing « Andreas Jacobsen’s Distraction http://blog.tmorris.net/javaruby-does-not-generalise-to-staticdynamic/#comment-19569 Static vs dynamic still isn’t about typing « Andreas Jacobsen’s Distraction Thu, 16 Oct 2008 12:12:51 +0000 http://blog.tmorris.net/?p=384#comment-19569 [...] a comment » Tony Morris claims that Java and Ruby don’t generalize to static and dynamic typing systems. He’s right, but it doesn’t really matter. What [...] [...] a comment » Tony Morris claims that Java and Ruby don’t generalize to static and dynamic typing systems. He’s right, but it doesn’t really matter. What [...]

]]> By: mark http://blog.tmorris.net/javaruby-does-not-generalise-to-staticdynamic/#comment-19556 mark Thu, 16 Oct 2008 07:28:22 +0000 http://blog.tmorris.net/?p=384#comment-19556 "what constitutes shorter code is often misunderstood " So I am confused. Is ruby code shorter than Java Code? Is python code shorter than Java Code? I really dont get the whole point as such. Java is simply a totally different language than ruby and python. Java is much more in the C/C++/C# camp - I think the comparisons are perfectly fine. In fact I believe ruby is one of the closest modern language that would feature a really true dynamic type system, more than any other prototype based TYPE system I found so far. And Java is about as dynamic as a big stone... “what constitutes shorter code is often misunderstood ”

So I am confused. Is ruby code shorter than Java Code?
Is python code shorter than Java Code?

I really dont get the whole point as such. Java is simply a totally different language than ruby and python. Java is much more in the C/C++/C# camp - I think the comparisons are perfectly fine. In fact I believe ruby is one of the closest modern language that would feature a really true dynamic type system, more than any other prototype based TYPE system I found so far.

And Java is about as dynamic as a big stone…

]]> By: Lachlan O'Dea http://blog.tmorris.net/javaruby-does-not-generalise-to-staticdynamic/#comment-19538 Lachlan O'Dea Thu, 16 Oct 2008 01:35:36 +0000 http://blog.tmorris.net/?p=384#comment-19538 The Chris Smith article was brilliant, thanks! The Chris Smith article was brilliant, thanks!

]]>