Talin writes:
> Lets start a new top-level thread to discuss this specific
> proposal.
tomer filiba writes:
> i'm sure my idea has flaws, but i'm very much pro-changing the type system.
[...]
> types are just an ancient relic, an implementation detail if you wish, that
> was brought from static languages, but is not appropriate to dynamic
> languages. static languages NEED types in order to produce machine
> code, dynamic languages don't, so a different mechanism is needed here,
> imho.
I think the idea of creating a new language with some of the wonderful
syntax of Python along with the wonderful type system of Haskell sounds
GREAT! I would be very interested, and would like to join in the
discussion.
But I don't think it belongs in the Python-3000 discussion group. Can
this discussion be moved elsewhere? Python 3.0 is going to have types,
and they're going to look very similar to the types in Python 2.X --
a brand new language would be a separate project.
-- Michael Chermside
_______________________________________________
Python-3000 mailing list
Python-3000@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
