Python is DOOMED! Again!

[Mark Lawrence]

On 29/01/2015 18:23, random832 at fastmail.us wrote:
>
> Statically typed lanugages by definition can never give you a TypeError
> - there are no runtime conversions that can succeed or fail based on the
> type of the arguments. What makes a statically typed language strong or
> weak? Are statically typed languages always weak?
>

They can give you lots of warnings about possible loss of data or 
similar.  Yes, you can silence these warnings if you know what you're 
doing.  You can also silence them if you don't know what you're doing. 
The end result could be a lovely, friendly segfault to debug.  What joy?

No, they're not always weakly typed.  The aim of the spreadsheet put up 
by Skip was to sort out (roughly) which languages belong in which camp. 
  I do not regard myself as suitably qualified to fill the thing out. 
Perhaps by now others have?

-- 
My fellow Pythonistas, ask not what our language can do for you, ask
what you can do for our language.

Mark Lawrence