On Monday, February 19, 2018 at 1:07:02 PM UTC, Anders Wegge Keller wrote: > På Mon, 19 Feb 2018 04:39:31 +0000 (UTC) > Steven D'Aprano skrev: > > On Mon, 19 Feb 2018 04:26:32 +0100, Anders Wegge Keller wrote: > > > > > På Mon, 19 Feb 2018 08:47:14 +1100 > > > Tim Delaney skrev: > > >> On 18 February 2018 at 22:55, Anders Wegge Keller <we...@wegge.dk> > > >> wrote: > > > > > > > > [...] > > > > > >> You couldn't have got the above much more wrong. > > > > > >> As others have said, typing is about how the underlying memory is > > >> treated. > > > > > > And that is exactly my point. Python does not have a typed list. It > > > have a list that takes whatever is thrown into it. > > > > > > I'll skip the rest, as you totally missed the point. > > > > I think its actually you have totally missed the point. What you want is > > a homogeneous list, a list which only accepts items of the same type. The > > built-in list is not that data structure, but Python already has > > something similar: see the array module. > > Given that I'm the one making a point about the unwarranted smugness, I > know that I'm not missing anything. Array is not even close to providing a > strongly typed container. For all of the yakking about other languages > weak, blah, BCPL, blah, I still wonder where that need to feel superior to > anything else comes from. > > Python isn't particular strong typed. In fact, apart from asking an object > what type it is, types are not that important. It's the interface that > matters. I wonder why this is a sore point for Python developers? > > > -- > //Wegge
Congratulations, you're the first new person I've had on my Dream Team for some months, fresh blood is always so welcome. -- Kindest regards. Mark Lawrence. -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
