Adding static typing to Python
justin at iago.org
Thu Feb 21 16:56:10 CET 2002
gbreed at cix.compulink.co.uk writes:
> It looks like "strong typing" doesn't have a universally agreed
> definition, so I suppose the best thing is to avoid the term.
Sounds good to me. I suspect that everything necessary can be
expressed with combinations of "static", "dynamic", and "weak".
("weak" can be used along with "static" to describe languages like C)
> Out of general interest, does anybody know of a dictionary I *can* rely on
> for these kind of definitions?
> If the type was declared only for the initial assignment, for example
> def cons(element, stuff: tuple):
> stuff = list(stuff)
> return tuple(stuff)
> would that still be static typing?
Most languages with static typing only require you to declare a given
name's type once. However, they also tend to enforce that you not
then rebind the name to a value of another type. So, I'm not sure how
I would describe the behavior shown in the example. That doesn't mean
that it doesn't make sense, but that I don't know how to classify it.
> Yes, and the example was of an identifier being bound to a different type.
> I never said any objects were changing type.
My apologies. I misread your description and went straight to the example.
More information about the Python-list