> why wasn’t there such a massive push for types in those languages
Are you just choosing to ignore all of the history of type checking Python and Ruby?
It’s not hard for me to imagine the reversal of this trend inevitably where everyone goes ‘the fuck are we writing all these verbose types for this dumb web app for?’.
> [why] are we writing all these verbose types for this dumb web app for?
You can take anything to the extreme, but types are a zero risk, low effort investment that has a quick return. If someone over-types something it's hardly a problem compared to an over engineered OOP codebase.
There are a bunch of people claiming this and that are OOP. To me OOP is encapsulating a mutable state inside a dynamic namespace (an object, an instance of class), with functions that can access the state and the ability to inherit / extend namespaces.
And I absolutely don't need it, I don't agree with the view some things are better done with OOP. Even gaming or GUI programming, domains typically considered to be the best for OOP, turned to ECS (which is very functional) and Elm style APIs.
Going back at OOP: I consider mutable state to be a necessary evil to be limited as much as possible; inheritance makes it hard to track what code is being run.
The best practice for writing OOP revolves around limiting mutable state and inheritance, so why even bother with OOP in the first place?
I can have encapsulation with namespaces / modules in functional languages as well. I don't need much else and I can live happily without `this` and using composition instead of inheritance.
OOP was the first marketing wave focused at developers and it's gone.