> The root of the problem is the system we were operating in: an impure programming language with weak dynamic typing.
Is it really fair to blame this on dynamic typing? Having setters with side effects seems like a design decision to me, and not one that is easily supported. I would be interested in hearing an explanation of why this behavior is javascript's fault.
I'm not blaming it definitively on dynamic typing. I'm blaming it on the overall system of incentives that I have observed seem to come up a lot more frequently with impurity and dynamic and/or weak typing.
In a pure programming language with strong static typing this effect would simply be impossible to produce in a way that wouldn't make the problem obvious.
Is it really fair to blame this on dynamic typing? Having setters with side effects seems like a design decision to me, and not one that is easily supported. I would be interested in hearing an explanation of why this behavior is javascript's fault.