Cedric and Bob are talking about the Continous Tax that you have to pay when you use dynamic languages.
Really? I have developed fairly large codebases in dynamic and static languages, and I never found this the case. In fact, if I had to make a gross generalization I would have to say:
- The dynamic language projects had less code, and it was easier for the team to maintain
- The dynamic language projects had small teams, so it was easier for us to maintain (we could do more with less)
- The Java projects were often over engineered (not a problem with Java per se, but epidemic to a large part of the community)
Of course, I have seen projects in both worlds that had to pay a lot of continuous tax. This was normally due to bad design, a poor choice of tools, a poor choice of developers, and a myriad of other reasons that had NOTHING to do with static vs. dynamic.
Quite frankly, at this stage of the game all I care about is having a small team of developers that I respect and enjoy working with.