PEP 3107 and stronger typing (note: probably a newbie question)

Ben Finney bignose+hates-spam at
Thu Jul 12 13:26:50 CEST 2007

Paul Rubin <> writes:

> The idea of designing languages with more and more support for
> ensuring program correctness is to put the established, repetitive
> processes into the computer where it belongs, freeing the programmer
> to be innovative while still providing high assurance of that the
> program will be right the first time.

This seems to make the dangerous assumption that the programmer has
the correct program in mind, and needs only to transfer it correctly
to the computer.

I would warrant that anyone who understands exactly how a program
should work before writing it, and makes no design mistakes before
coming up with a program that works, is not designing a program of any

> Also, taking a learn-from-mistakes approach is fine and dandy if the
> consequences of the mistakes stay contained to those who make them.
> It's completely different if the consequences are imposed on other
> people who weren't part of the process.

Certainly. Which is why the trend continues toward developing programs
such that mistakes of all kinds cause early, obvious failure -- where
they have a much better chance of being caught and fixed *before*
innocent hands get ahold of them.

 \        "We have to go forth and crush every world view that doesn't |
  `\             believe in tolerance and free speech."  -- David Brin |
_o__)                                                                  |
Ben Finney

More information about the Python-list mailing list