Python for large projects

Cameron Laird claird at
Tue Mar 23 17:24:09 CET 2004

In article <mailman.288.1080056671.742.python-list at>,
Dave Brueck <dave at> wrote:
>Piet wrote:
>> >>>>> Jacek Generowicz <jacek.generowicz at> (JG) wrote:
>> JG> I feel honour-bound to point out that citing static typing (explicit
>> JG> static typing, in particular) as a means of creating more correct
>> JG> programs, to be one of the greatest contemporary myths of software
>> JG> engineering.
>I'm not familiar enough with some of the more modern languages that use
>explicit static typing to know if they offer other advantages beyond helping
>the compiler be more efficient, but from experience I don't hesitate to say
>that the explicit type systems of Pascal/C++/Java seem to do more harm than
>good (meaning that if they provide some benefit, overall it's still a net
>negative due to the extra burden they place on the developers). For large
>projects in particular they seem to get in the way more and more as the project
>increases in size.

I want to call attention to this.  Dave and I appear to be in
agreement that, while common wisdom in our field is that C++,
Java, and so on, are serious languages that are the only 
realistic choices for large projects, we are both saying that
they're at a particular DISadvantage there.  If you have a
big job, you *particularly* need to look at Python (or Erlang,
or Eiffel, or ...)

Cameron Laird <claird at>

More information about the Python-list mailing list