> initial development was faster but long-term maintenance costs were much higher for stuff written in dynamic languages like Python and Ruby than in static languages like Java and C++.
I don't have any hard data, but this feels right. I wonder what would be the results with Clojure, which certainly isn't statically typed, but doesn't do duck-typed function dispatch (like Ruby and Python, and even Go) either.
It's a misnomer to say that Go uses duck-typing because an object must statically implement a complete interface, not just a subset that's hopefully sufficient for what happens at runtime.
I don't have any hard data, but this feels right. I wonder what would be the results with Clojure, which certainly isn't statically typed, but doesn't do duck-typed function dispatch (like Ruby and Python, and even Go) either.