3 ms·
(I've never seriously used Haskell) I wonder if the strong static typing has something to do with that. That eliminates many if the common bugs found in Python
by jdormit 9y ago
(I've never seriously used Haskell) I wonder if the strong static typing has something to do with that. That eliminates many if the common bugs found in Python programs.
- xapata 9y agoIn my experience, type errors in Python get discovered during testing. So, I doubt that's the reason. Perhaps the nature of Haskell discourages changes, making the community more stable.
- yen223 9y ago> In my experience, type errors in Python get discovered during testing That would be the optimistic view. In reality, `NoneType has no attribute Foo` errors happen in production all the time.
- xapata 9y agoPerhaps because someone got into the (bad) habit of returning Nones instead of raising errors. Errors should never pass silently, etc. The older Python APIs have that C habit of sentinel values, but more modern style is to raise an error on failure.
- yen223 9y agoFunctions implicitly returns None if you forget to provide a return value on any of the branches. This is an error that can easily slip past eyeball reviews, since this is caused by the absence of something.
- xapata 9y agoShouldn't unit tests be exploring all the code paths? I know that's tough to enforce, but it's ideal. Regardless of whether you use a static analyzer. And Python does have static analyzers, including for typing.
- marcosdumay 9y agoI don't think it's strong types either. It is not about the libraries having less bugs, but about they keeping compatibility for much longer (and when they break it, they tend to break in smaller ways). Could be because of extra flexibility those types grant you, but it's not about bugs.