not safe at all
9nick9m at alum.mit.edu
Fri Jul 13 22:57:54 CEST 2001
On Fri, 13 Jul 2001 19:50:04 GMT, Terry Reedy <tjreedy at home.com> wrote:
>> I believe it, but it doesn't demonstrate a thing about type safety.
>> You've just discovered dynamic typing.
>This might be better called dynamic naming or dynamic binding. 'Dynaming
>typing' is confusing, as evidenced here, because of its two possible
>1. Types are assigned at runtime (because they are created at runtime).
>2. Types are changeable at runtime. Untrue, unless you count changing an
>instance's base class (a recent addition to the language. In this sense,
>Python object types are fixed or static. They are not like C unions.
Indeed. I'll try to remember to use "dynamic binding" in the future:
while 'dynamic typing' was what I used in school, it does indeed
suffer from the ambiguity you note.
Nick Mathewson <9 nick 9 m at alum dot mit dot edu>
Remove 9's to respond. No spam.
More information about the Python-list