Python from Wise Guy's Viewpoint

[Joe Marshall]

Joachim Durchholz <joachim.durchholz at web.de> writes:

> Espen Vestre wrote:
>> Now you're conflating two readings of "want declarations" (i.e.  "want
>> them whenever they're convenient for optimizing" vs. "want them
>> everywhere and always")
>
> Type inference is about "as much static checking as possible with as
> little annotations as absolutely necessary".
> HM typing is extremely far on the "few declarations" side: a handful
> even in large systems.

I certainly don't mind as much static checking as possible.  I get a
little put off by *any* annotations that are *absolutely necessary*,
though.  My preference is that all `lexically correct' code be
compilable, even if the object code ends up being the single
instruction `jmp error-handler'.  Of course I'd like to get a
compilation warning in this case.

>
> It sounds unbelievable, but it really works.
>

I believe you.  I have trouble swallowing claims like `It is never
wrong, always completes, and the resulting code never has a run-time
error.' or `You will never need to run the kind of code it doesn't allow.'