Python Popularity: Questions and Comments

[Dr. David J. Ritchie, Sr.]

In regard to what Justin Sheehy wrote:

> "Dr. David J. Ritchie, Sr." <djrassoc01 at mindspring.com> writes:
>
> > there are features of Java (like strong typing) that at least
> > mandate a certain level of consistency between all execution paths.
>
> Python has strong typing.  It does not, however, have static typing or
> explicit type declarations, which are probably what you are thinking about.

Yes, I suppose that is it. To me, the requirement of saying what a variable is and
then using it as you said it to be builds in a certain cross checking which one can
>assert< results in more reliable code.  Are there any studies to support such
a view?  I am not aware of any so I have to regard myself as engaging in hand-waving
and demonstrating the marketing myth driven decision making process which I
described in my original post.

>
>
> > I can argue to myself to dismiss that one by saying that of course
> > interpretative languages should not be expected to hold to that
> > level of validation.
>
> Could you please explain what an "interpretative language" is and how
> Java and Python are different with regard to that definition?
>
> Before you answer, realize that both are generally translated into an
> intermediate language and then that language is executed by a virtual
> machine at runtime.

And the virtual machine byte code is eventually translated into microcode in
some chip, etc., etc.  I think what I was trying to get at was the problem of
validating code when the language allows run time definition of the code and
execution of it through an exec or eval or whatever.  I am probably on shaky
ground here due to ignorance but that's what I was refering to anyway.

--
Dr. David J. Ritchie, Sr.
djrassoc01 at mindspring.com
http://home.mindspring.com/~djrassoc01/