On 1/3/2012 4:06 PM, Devin Jeanpierre wrote:
Python objects are strongly typed, in any sensible meaning of the term.
There are people that hold definitions of strong typing that preclude
Python. Those people think their definition is reasonable, but at the
Can you give an actual example of such a definition of 'strongly typed
object' that excludes Python objects?
same time haven't confused static typing with strong typing. I guess
the problem is that this boils down to opinion, but you're stating it
as incontrovertible fact.
This strikes me as petty hair-splitting.
1. By tacking on the qualification, I was acknowledging that someone,
somewhere, might controvert it. If you allow for arbitrary redefinitions
of words, you could claim that any statement is an opinion. So what?
2. It ignores the context established by the OP who began with 'Let's
say we wanted to type strongly in Python' and continued with a question
about declarations and compilation specifically to C or C++.
In that context, I think my statement qualifies as a fact.
--
Terry Jan Reedy
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
