Is Python your only programming language?

[Nick Vargish]

Tim Rowe <tim at remove_if_not_spam.digitig.co.uk> writes:

> If I want to get something up and running quickly then I go straight
> to Python.  If thousands of lives depend on the code working right I
> would not be allowed to use Python, and, IMHO, quite rightly too.  It
> just doesn't have what it needs for proving correctness, and adding
> those things would scupper the getting things up and running
> quickly.

So what programming language actually does bridge the gap between
"thousands of lives depend on the code working right" and "getting
this up and running quickly"?

Whenever someone implies that compile-time type checking provides some
"proof of correctness", I think about (void *) and am not very
convinced.

Nick

-- 
#  sigmask  ||  0.2  ||  20030107  ||  public domain  ||  feed this to a python
print reduce(lambda x,y:x+chr(ord(y)-1),' Ojdl!Wbshjti!=obwAcboefstobudi/psh?')