Despite the positive tone, what really struck me in this article was that they struggle with getting people to work on the compiler because it is too complex.
It just confirms my main criticism against advance statically typed languages: They are simply too complex.
It is why I have more faith in languages like Julia, because you can achieve a tremendous amounts of power, expressiveness and performance in a relatively simple language.
Dynamic typing gives you simplicity in the type system which is impossible to achieve with static type checking.
Long term this has profound implications. People can keep hacking on and expanding Julia because they can wrap their head around the language. You don't need to be Einstein to grok it.
I think you may also see Clojure overtake Scala for the same reason. The simplicity of Clojure may in the long run overtake Scala although Scala benefits a lot from similarity to Java at a superficial level.
It just confirms my main criticism against advance statically typed languages: They are simply too complex.
It is why I have more faith in languages like Julia, because you can achieve a tremendous amounts of power, expressiveness and performance in a relatively simple language.
Dynamic typing gives you simplicity in the type system which is impossible to achieve with static type checking.
Long term this has profound implications. People can keep hacking on and expanding Julia because they can wrap their head around the language. You don't need to be Einstein to grok it.
I think you may also see Clojure overtake Scala for the same reason. The simplicity of Clojure may in the long run overtake Scala although Scala benefits a lot from similarity to Java at a superficial level.