Raffael Cavallaro schrieb: > On 2006-06-14 15:04:34 -0400, Joachim Durchholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > >> Um... heterogenous lists are not necessarily a sign of expressiveness. >> The vast majority of cases can be transformed to homogenous lists >> (though these might then contain closures or OO objects). >> >> As to references to nonexistent functions - heck, I never missed >> these, not even in languages without type inference :-) >> >> [[snipped - doesn't seem to relate to your answer]] > > This is a typical static type advocate's response when told that users > of dynamically typed languages don't want their hands tied by a type > checking compiler: > > "*I* don't find those features expressive so *you* shouldn't want them."
And this is a typical dynamic type advocate's response when told that static typing has different needs: "*I* don't see the usefulness of static typing so *you* shouldn't want it, either." No ad hominem arguments, please. If you find my position undefendable, give counterexamples. Give a heterogenous list that would to too awkward to live in a statically-typed language. Give a case of calling nonexistent functions that's useful. You'll get your point across far better that way. Regards, Jo -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
