Most active channels

Most discussed users

Most supported premises

Static typing is better than dynamic typing in programming languages.

Static typing allows compilers to optimize in a way that is hardly achievable with dynamic typed languages
28 supporter.

Static typing is better than dynamic typing in programming languages.

Programming tools like IDE's can provide a richer set of supporting features or they are more sophisticated. Mainly regarding refactoring, suggestions, debugging, metrics, detection, prove, inspection, documention, generation, build,...
18 supporter.

Functional programming is not useful for most apps

It's not clear what the "most apps" are. There are userfacing apps, server, games, trading. Usecases differ. In some cases FP can be applied well, in some it can not. Lets say, even if you couldn't apply pure FP well in most cases, maybe it can to a very important one... Also there's multiparadigm.
9 supporter.

Web programming is getting unnecessarily complicated

JavaScript is a dysfunctional language
9 supporter.
1 fallacy report.
Irrelevant Conclusion

Static typing is better than dynamic typing in programming languages.

Refactoring is *much* *much* harder in dynamically typed languages. Exponentially so across a larger codebase.
7 supporter.

Static typing is better than dynamic typing in programming languages.

It's harder to develop in and maintain big codebases or legacy code.
6 supporter.

Static typing is better than dynamic typing in programming languages.

Doesn't have to be. Verbosity has nothing to do with static typing or not (See witty one-liners in FP languages). The same bloat also exists in dynamic languages. Eg. Facebook and php. It's an expression of bad design and not of language. Static typing doesn't promote that kind of bad design per se.
6 supporter.

Static typing is better than dynamic typing in programming languages.

Static type checking provides a very important category of tests (and help prevent logical errors too). These sort of tests don't need to be explicitly written. On the other hand they are more often than not neglected in dynamic languages.
4 supporter.

Evolution is not observable.

Everything we observe in the universe is like that. We create a theory / formula for it. We don't really know 100% if something is true. We only have probabilities and strong indications. F = G * m1 * m2 / r ^ 2 seems to be a very good representation of grav. force. For macrocosmos that is.
3 supporter.

Static typing is better than dynamic typing in programming languages.

It's easier to manage a large team or a big codebase.
3 supporter.
1 fallacy report.
Fallacy Of Red Herring