[Types-SIG] Python vs. Smalltalk/Strongtalk, etc. Was: The Types- SIG is comatose.

Golden, Howard GoldenH@littoncorp.com
Fri, 3 Dec 1999 10:03:04 -0800

Paul Prescod wrote:

> And let's start with a clear direction from the Powers that Be. 
> I propose:
>  * the goal is a optional static type system for version 2. 
>  * presume that the type/class dichotomy has been removed in V2
>  * backwards compatibility with current code is relatively important
>  * compatibility with the Python 1.x interpreter is NOT important
>  * interfaces are not an issue
>  * parameterized (template) types are not available
>  * names are type checked, not expressions
>  * got now, only named types (types and classes) can be declared, not
> lists and tuples of types

There are a lot of different proposals.  Do we all agree on all of these
points? (Unlikely!)

> Start from these (very similar!) proposals:
> http://www.python.org/~rmasse/papers/python-types/
> The current Visual Basic type system
> Something somewhere from JimH
> The type declaration part of strongtalk
> The first half of this:
> http://www.foretec.com/python/workshops/1998-11/greg-type-ideas.html

It must be serendipity, but I was just thinking about this subject
yesterday, and I went so far as to look up Strongtalk and download Squeak.

Syntax differences aside, what I think we would benefit from is a comparison
of the capabilities of Python1.x and proposed Python2 to
Smalltalk/Strongtalk/Squeak, Visual Basic, etc.  For me, I am looking at
Python as a general purpose language, rather than a scripting language, so
programming-in-the-large features are important.

-- Specific questions: --

What if the C definition of functions and methods were extended by adding a
signature object?  (If so, how can signatures be specified?)  Could the
signatures then be used to generate more efficient code?  Should there be
function/method choice by signature?

Maybe I'm trying to make Python into something it wasn't intended to be, but
I have this wish that I wouldn't have to use different languages for
different tasks.

Howard B. Golden
Software developer
Litton Industries, Inc.
Woodland Hills, California