Optional Static Typing: Part II

John Roth newsgroups at jhrothjr.com
Tue Jan 4 21:15:06 CET 2005

Guido has posted a second blog entry on the optional static typing 
I like this a lot better than the first.


Now, the base objective seems to be to incorporate PyChecker
functionality into the root. This in turn requires type inference,
which in turn strongly suggests type annotations to help the
inferencer out over rough spots.

I like this approach a lot.

There's also an explicit recognition that there are a lot of
use cases for being able to access type information at
run time.

I also like this. I'm kind of neutral to the idea of using it
for actual type checking: I don't think that it catches that
many errors if the developer is doing a decent job of
testing. However, since it's going to be supplemental to
type inference, it will be a lot less intrusive.

There's a new approach to interfaces that looks
intriguing. One nice part is the ability to include
Design By Contract type preconditions with the
interface. It will be even better if they can be checked
at compile time, or by the PyChecker functionality.

I have to say this turned my attitude around on the
subject: I'm quite in favor of the direction Guido
seems to be going.

John Roth

More information about the Python-list mailing list