On Jan 13, 11:40 pm, Steven D'Aprano <ste...@remove.this.cybersource.com.au> wrote:
> But, gosh darn it, wouldn't it be nice to program the critical parts of > your code in "strict Python", and leave the rest as "trusting Python", > instead of having to use Java for the lot just to get strictness in the > critical parts? If only there was a way to do this, and ensure people > won't abuse it. Yes, that would indeed be nice. I am certainly not the only one who could use a language that is excellent for both research prototyping *and* the final, safety-critical system. Then perhaps the prototype could just be cleaned up and "hardened" for the end product rather than rewritten in another language -- by programmers in another state who may fail to understand many of the details that the prototype developer agonized over. I don't know if such a versatile language could even exist, but it would sure be valuable. Maybe it's like asking for a football player who can excel as both a wide receiver and a guard. But players who weigh 280 pounds and run a 4.4 40 are hard to find. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
