> You mean static data typing, right? Are there any known holes in the > dynamic type system that still need to be plugged? (I haven't heard of > any.)
My apologies. You are right, I meant optional, static typing. Thanks for the catch Jeff. Python's dynamic typing is just fine. But if I know the type, I want the ability to nail it. ...local variables, arguments, return values, etc And if I don't know or care, I'd leave it to dynamic typing. The need for a lot of doc goes away, those new to the language that think it's a big deal can be explicit, and as I suggested earlier, I think the byte code interpreter could be made a lot smarter and faster. ...and corporate acceptance would follow. Larry -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
