On Oct 28, 7:52 am, "Alf P. Steinbach" <al...@start.no> wrote: [snip] > But since I don't know much Python -- I'm *learning* Python as I write -- I > know > that there's a significant chance of communicating misconceptions, > non-idiomatic > ways to do things, bad conventions, etc., in addition to of course plain > errors > of fact and understanding in general, to which I'm not yet immune... > > So I would would be very happy for feedback.
OK, I'll start the flame war then: I can see the purpose of section 1.5, but from the end of the 3rd paragraph, you seem to go into religious matters rather than actual facts, which seems to me a bit out of place in a book only supposed to teach programming. Basically saying that any "serious" program has to be written in a statically typed language and that such a language kind of automatically makes the development faster and the quality higher is just not true from my experience, and from the experience of many people on this group, I guess. IMNSHO, the 4th paragraph of section 1.5 in its current form is highly subjective and should be completely rewritten, if not simply removed. Sorry if that sounds rough: I've seen this written too many times (usually without any argumentation, BTW) and it has a tendency to make me a little upset. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
