Also of interest is the talk "The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Dynamic Typing for Practical Programs" https://vimeo.com/74354480 which questions whether static typing really has any benefit.
Tim On 1/19/21, Tim Daly <axiom...@gmail.com> wrote: > Peter Naur wrote an article of interest: > http://pages.cs.wisc.edu/~remzi/Naur.pdf > > In particular, it mirrors my notion that Axiom needs > to embrace literate programming so that the "theory > of the problem" is presented as well as the "theory > of the solution". I quote the introduction: > > > > This article is, to my mind, the most accurate account > of what goes on in designing and coding a program. > I refer to it regularly when discussing how much > documentation to create, how to pass along tacit > knowledge, and the value of the XP's metaphor-setting > exercise. It also provides a way to examine a methodolgy's > economic structure. > > In the article, which follows, note that the quality of the > designing programmer's work is related to the quality of > the match between his theory of the problem and his theory > of the solution. Note that the quality of a later programmer's > work is related to the match between his theories and the > previous programmer's theories. > > Using Naur's ideas, the designer's job is not to pass along > "the design" but to pass along "the theories" driving the design. > The latter goal is more useful and more appropriate. It also > highlights that knowledge of the theory is tacit in the owning, and > so passing along the thoery requires passing along both explicit > and tacit knowledge. > > Tim >