type checking

[Anand Pillai]

I consider Python as high-level psuedo-code. It helps me in
programming, since you dont make mistakes while writing 
psuedo-code. So it follows by induction that you dont make
these mistakes like static type errors while programming python.

It is a different approach, by altering your thinking, rather
than relying on tools. Works for me ;-)

Write python program as you would write a flow chart or psuedo-code.
The language constructs are so damn intuitive that it allows you
the freedom to do so.

In the second iteration you can do type checking by perhaps
using the built-in 'type' meta call.


-Anand

sashan <mabus at operamail.com> wrote in message news:<bmb6f1$qqj$1 at lust.ihug.co.nz>...
> Donn Cave wrote:
> > Quoth Stephen Horne <$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$@$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.co.uk>:
> > ...
> > | If you really do need static typing (as opposed to simply needing to
> > | get used to the change), Python is simply the wrong choice of
> > | language. Either Java, C# or Delphi may be a good option for you.
> > 
> > Also consider functional languages with strong static typing and
> > type inference - Haskell, Clean, ML, Objective CAML.  Even if they
> > eventually turn out to be unsuitable for the task at hand, they
> > offer an interesting and rigorous abstraction of computer programming.
> > 
> > 	Donn Cave, donn at drizzle.com
> 
> If it was practical I'd use OCaml or Haskell but they don't have the 
> external libraries I need.