Python is DOOMED! Again!

[Paul Rubin]

Rustom Mody <rustompmody at gmail.com> writes:
> However Peyton Jones is known to have said that for Haskell,
> Haskell is on a Damas-Milner cusp

He's talking about the hairy recent stuff that edge Haskell towards
dependent types.  E.g. type families (type-level functions) plus
type-level numbers, etc.  I don't think anyone has suggested pressing
Python type hints to anywhere near such lengths.

Really, I think the examples to look to are Erlang (Dialyzer) and Racket
(Typed Racket), not Haskell.  Clojure's static types are adapted from
Racket's and should work in about the same way.  These (unlike Haskell)
are all examples of optional static types, where you can mix static and
dynamic code or leave out all the annotations if you want.  

I have to say that my personal experience with the Erlang dialyzer
wasn't all that great, but I was new to it and I think it's probably
more effective when used the "right" way, i.e. by people who are more
used to it than I was.