Ben Sizer wrote: > Ray wrote: > > Actually Bruno, don't you think that the notion of flexibility in > > Python comes at the expense of "security" is simply due to the fact > > that the syntax of "screw up" is exactly the same as the syntax of "I > > mean it this way and I do want it"? > > > > Perhaps if we use a different syntax when we want to say "I really want > > this", it'll be better (so Python can differentiate between a typo and > > a conscious decision). > > Surely the very nature of a typo is that you don't know at the time of > typing that you've done the wrong thing. Therefore it's impossible to > signal to Python that you don't want what you've actually typed!
Exactly! So what I'm saying is that if the syntax of rebinding a method *has* to be different then assignment, maybe it'll catch typos more often. (Of course if you STILL make a typo error while using a different syntax...) > The only way statically-typed languages prevent these errors is > typically by prohibiting the operation entirely. Since Python doesn't > want to do that, you can't effectively prevent this type of error. > Luckily, I find that they don't actually arise in practice, and I've > spent orders of magnitude more time in C++ having to coerce objects > from one type to another to comply with the static typing than I > probably ever will spend debugging Python programs where a typo caused > an error of this type. Yeah, I fully agree. Even Java is heaven compared to C++. > > -- > Ben Sizer -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
