Hacker News Reader

> Static type checking (which is what I assume you mean by "typing") can also be a massive pain in the ass that stands in the way of incremental development,

No they dont. There is nothing about types that would make incremental develpment harder. They keep having the same benefits when being incremental.

View on HN

> There is nothing about types that would make incremental develpment harder.

Oh, please, this is either lack of imagination or lack of effort to think. You've never wanted to test a subset of a library halfway through a refactor?

Yes, type checkers are very good at tracking refactoring progress. If it turns out that you can proceed to test some subset, then congratulations, you found a new submodule.

I am continually astounded by the stubborn incuriosity of humans with a bone to pick.

What in the world are you talking about. Please specify how lack of types helped you in your aforementioned scenario.

I don't think it's a lack of curiosity from others. But it's more like fundamental lack of knowledge from you. Let's hear it. What is it are you actually talking about? Testing a subset of a library halfway though a refactor? How does a lack of types help with that?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com