On Friday, February 16, 2018 at 10:25:32 PM UTC-6, Chris Angelico wrote: [...] > This is often touted as a necessity for industrial-grade > software. It isn't. There are many things that a type > system, no matter how sophisticated, cannot catch; for some > reason, though, we don't hear people saying "C is useless > for industrial-grade software because it doesn't have > function contracts".
And likewise, there are many problems that a seatbelt cannot protect you against -- like for instance: a car-jacker shooting you in the head at point-blank range. But we don't throw the baby out with the bath water, do we? > Anyway, if you want some system of type checking, you can > use static analysis (eg tools like MyPy) to go over your > code the same way a compiler might. Are you suggesting this project for std-lib inclusion? > "The first glaring issue is that I have no guarantee that > is_valid() returns a bool type." -- huh? It's being used in > a boolean context, and it has a name that starts "is_". How > much guarantee are you looking for? *ANY* object can be > used in an 'if', so it doesn't even matter. This is a > stupidly contrived criticism. > > > Python markets itself as a dynamically-typed programming > > language, similar to Perl, Ruby, or JavaScript. The word > > “dynamically typed” has a positive connotation, more so > > than “weakly typed.” Conversely, the word “strongly typed” > > sounds more positive than saying “statically typed.” > > Those are all different terms, and all of them are > misunderstood. They're not synonyms. The author was underscoring the unfortunate psychological semantics at play when words like "strong" are juxtaposed with words like "weak". Sadly, old boy, i believe you've missed the point! > > Python ships with a threading module; but due to how the > > Python interpreter is implemented, it can only ever run > > one thread at a time. This is due to the infamous Global > > Interpreter Lock (GIL). In an age when the only computers > > around had a single core, this was nothing to fuss over. > > Totally not true. The GIL does not stop other threads from > running. Also, Python has existed for multiple CPU systems > pretty much since its inception, I believe. (Summoning the > D'Aprano for history lesson?) Unfortunately "D'App-ran?...Oh!" is still debugging his hello world program. He'll be along later. Or never... Whichever comes /last/. [...] -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
