Python from Wise Guy's Viewpoint

[Adrian Hey]

Raffael Cavallaro wrote:

> Matthias Blume <find at my.address.elsewhere> wrote in message
> news:<m11xsx2aiu.fsf at tti5.uchicago.edu>...
> 
> 
>> > > Pascal Costanza <costanza at web.de> writes:
>> > No, for christ's sake! There are dynamically typed programs that you
>> > cannot translate into statically typed ones!
>> 
>> Yes you can.  (In the worst case scenario you lose all the benefits of
>> static typing.  But a translation is *always* possible. After all,
>> dynamically typed programs are already statically typed in the trival
>> "one type fits all" sense.)
> 
> This is sophistry at its worst. If you "translate" a dynamically typed
> program into a statically typed language by eliminating all the static
> type checking, then WTF is the point of the static type checking?

Read what he wrote..in particular the words *WORST CASE SCENARIO*

Regards
--
Adrian Hey