harri a écrit : > Bruno Desthuilliers wrote: > [...] >> It seems obvious from this that static typecheking would require >> dropping all dynamism from Python - then turning it into another, very >> different (and mostly useless as far as I'm concerned) language. IOW : >> you can't have Python *and* static typechecks - both are mutually >> exclusive. Hence my answer : if you want static typecheking, you'll have >> to use another language - one way or another. > > Well, static typing for me is usually the way to get the last speed > required once the > algorithmic improvements are exhausted.
Indeed - static typing is for compilers, not for programmers. > The language Pyrex uses combines dynamic and static typing in a very > useful manner. Yes. But Pyrex is another language - and a much less dynamic one. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
