Steve Holden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> In other words, you want Python to be strongly-typed, but sometimes
> you want to allow a reference to be to any object whatsoever. In which
> case you can't possibly do any sensible type-checking on it, so this
> new Python+ or whatever you want to call it will suffer from the same
> shortcomings that C++ and java do, which is to say type checking can't
> possibly do anything useful when the acceptable type of a reference is
> specified as ANY.
Let's see if I understand what you're saying:
C and Java: you get useful type checking except when you declare
a reference as type ANY. This is a shortcoming compared to:
Python: where you get no useful type checking at all.
That is not very convincing logic.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
