optional static typing for Python

Bruno Desthuilliers bruno.42.desthuilliers at wtf.websiteburo.oops.com
Mon Jan 28 10:53:37 CET 2008

Russ P. a écrit :
> On Jan 27, 5:03 pm, Paddy
>> If static typing is optional then a program written in a dynamic
>> language that passes such an automated static analysis of source code
>> would have to be a simple program written in a simplistic way, and
>> also in a static style.
> Yes, but for safety-critical software you usually want the simplest
> possible solution. The last think you want is an unnecessarily "fancy"
> design. Unless there is a darn good reason to write a "non-static"
> program, you just don't do it.
> You might want to check into what the FAA allows in "flight-critical"
> code, for example. I am certainly not an expert in that area, but I've
> had a passing exposure to it. My understanding is that every possible
> branch of the code must be fully and meticulously analyzed and
> verified. Hence, the dynamic dispatching of ordinary object-oriented
> code is either prohibited or severely frowned upon.

Then Python is definitively out, so this whole thread is pointless.

More information about the Python-list mailing list