Dynamism and Database Referential Integrity

[Karl M. Syring]

"Hung Jung Lu" <hungjunglu at yahoo.com> schrieb
<snip>
> Programmers with C++/Java background frequently complains about
> Python, because it does not enforce type-checking. In particular, you
> don't have Java interfaces, you don't have polymorphic methods, etc.
> And in Python when you type 'spam.eggs', you don't have "compile-time"
> checking that 'eggs' is a member of 'spam'. Anyway, these complains
> are seen frequently in comp.lang.python, yet Python has been
> time-tested and has proven itself to be a viable programming language.
> So dynamism seems to offer a large number of advantages over static
> type checking.
<snip>

Well, Java and C++ have no strong type checking, they have type declarations
that can  easily be subverted. If you want type checking at compile time,
you have to look for Haskell or ML-style languages. The revelation that you
can have type safety without explicit type declarations can come as quite a
shock.

Karl M. Syring