W2D2 - Why static typing came back

As I'm writing this, I'm letting my brute force implementation of Advent of Code Day 5 run free. My estimate was 3 hours, I'm time-boxing writing this post to 30 minutes and let's see where we are when I finish writing this post (edit: 30 minutes it looks like I'll need 3 more hours, so new estimate is 3.5 hours).

Advent of Code Day 4 was definitely more straightforward than Day 24. I got to re-use the scanner I built for Day 24, which is always satisfying.

I watched Why static typing came back on the back of Bob Nystrom's tweet, where he wrote loved it (in emphasis). I really enjoyed the talk, so much so that I'm keen to find other talks by Richard Feldman (last time this happened was probably Bryan Cantrill) and even opened up Roc's website.

In a nutshell, the talk described how (1) dynamic languages exploded when the Internet became a thing and being slow wasn't terrible because the modem was even slower, (2) dynamic languages introduced a number of features that made it more fun to code in plus you get faster iteration cycles, but (3) these features were introduced by dynamic languages but nothing stopping static languages adopting it, so with fast compilers and LSP / IDEs static languages can get the best of both worlds (but the reverse is not necessarily true).

Later in the afternoon I realized I'll be going to a Zig meetup the next day but haven't played around that much with Zig. I watched Andrew Kelley's Intro to Zig but had a hard time concentrating. I noted how I really like one of the goals of Zig (namely "Raise the standards of software as a craft throughout the industry") and the quote below (which made me think about Ben Kuhn's In defense of blub studies), but skipped to other videos around the 15 minute mark.

Think about colleagues that you have and you can probably rank them in your mind about which ones are more capable and which ones aren’t. There’s a pattern that I noticed and sometimes you think that it’s the person with more years of experience that is more capable but I’ve found that it’s actually just the person who’s willing to dive deep the most and learn the most about the system that they’re working with who actually ends up being the more capable person.

More 'popular' videos I watched instead were Zig in 100 seconds and Initial thoughts on Zig. My takeaways were custom allocators and comptime are unique to Zig but I'll need more homework to explain this well.

The Zig's new relationship with LLVM post I found really interesting even if the later parts went over my head. I've been curious about Mojo and the post illuminated considerations and trade-offs around language toolchains. What's really cool is making LLVM optional allows Zig to be developed fully in Zig, faster compilation and allows for in-place binary patching.