[IronPython] Questions for FAQ or User Guide

[Keith J. Farmer]

Well, the point I was going to bring up last night was that one could live very happily within IronPython, following Pythonic customs; but one should be expected to follow the customs that exist in the CLR world when talking with it.
 
Some types I can see free conversions for -- particularly value types.  Some types, such as arrays, would be tricker and I suspect impossible in cases: for those I'd desire strong-typing.  For stuff that IronPython may expose to the outside world, strong-typing should be a requirement (even if it's declaring the type to be Object), no?
 
C#2 brings on type inference for delegates, so I can see a similar scheme going on.  For IronPython I think it'd be closer to a dispatch based on type, which I can see getting very bloaty.
 
I'm not familiar with how Jim addressed this in Jython?

________________________________

From: users-ironpython.com-bounces at lists.ironpython.com on behalf of Richard Monson-Haefel
Sent: Wed 4/20/2005 2:22 PM
To: Discussion of IronPython
Subject: Re: [IronPython] Questions for FAQ or User Guide



Well, the way I see it (not that my opinion is all that important, but
...) you should be able to use more explicit typing by declaring the
System.Double [] type  if you desire, but IronPython should attempt to
do the transformation if you choose not to (or neglect) to do so. That
way you get both options. Very explicit type conversions or implicit
conversions.  It becomes a matter of style.  The thing to remember,
IMO, is that IronPython is a dynamic language and by nature dynamic
language are loosely typed. If you require explicit typing, than you
are breaking that model, in which case you might as well not use
IronPython at all.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: winmail.dat
Type: application/ms-tnef
Size: 4809 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/ironpython-users/attachments/20050420/6b463ce2/attachment.bin>