does lack of type declarations make Python unsafe?

Donn Cave donn at u.washington.edu
Tue Jun 17 18:52:24 CEST 2003


In article <4017400e.0306162016.b0f8c6c at posting.google.com>,
 marshall at spamhole.com (marshall) wrote:
...
> Most of the code I come across in strong typed languages makes heavy
> use of type coercion.  So how does typing help if you are just going
> to coerce everything?

It's unfortunate, but then most of the code in existence today
was written for languages that are pretty old now and aren't
necessarily the best example of anything.  You're right about
coercion, in my opinion but also in the opinion of people who
have created some more rigorous static typing languages.

Of the ones I know about, Haskell and Objective CAML are the
most interesting.  Haskell being the more interesting language
and ocaml the more interesting compiler (cf. F# if you're a .NET
fan.)  Haskell is maybe too interesting, it even types the
execution model if that makes sense (and won't right away.)

   Donn Cave, donn at u.washington.edu




More information about the Python-list mailing list