Objects in Python

[lipska the kat]

On 22/08/12 18:01, Terry Reedy wrote:
> On 8/22/2012 10:59 AM, lipska the kat wrote:
>
>> There is no real enforced concept of information hiding, no binding of
>> type to variable in fact no concept of typing at all as far as I can
>> see.
>
> Given that type(valid_name) always returns a type(class), that is a
> slightly strange statement.

[snip]

Well I'm a beginner so I'm allowed to make strange statements.
However I don't think it's that strange and here's why.

If, in a language, I find I am able to say

a = 1

then later, in the same scope I can say

a = "foo"

then later again in the same scope I can say

a = ([1,2,3], "xyz", True)

then, and I may be missing something here, to me, that doesn't say 
'strongly typed' that says 'no typing constraints whatsoever'

If you can show me a 'type' that cannot be assigned to

a

in the same scope then I would be most interested to know, I haven't 
found one yet.

We need to separate out the 'view' from the 'implementation' here.
Most developers I know, if looking at the code and without the possibly 
dubious benefit of knowing that in Python 'everything is an object' 
would not call this 'strong typing'

Once again, this is not a criticism, it's an observation

It is OK to to make (possibly erroneous) observations isn't it?

Thanks for taking the time to reply.

lipska

-- 
Lipska the Kat©: Troll hunter, sandbox destroyer
and farscape dreamer of Aeryn Sun