2 ms·

> The original question was about Python the language, not Python the ecosystem. Python doesn't have a spec, so the argument that the language doesn't support

> The original question was about Python the language, not Python the ecosystem. Python doesn't have a spec, so the argument that the language doesn't support static typing is dubious at best, since a static type checker is maintained by the language itself. If I alias python to `mypy $0 && python $0` or whatnot, is it no longer python? It's certainly statically typed. > Because of this distinction, it is never a genuine concern of a developer in Java or another statically typed language whether third-party libraries will be properly typed. There do not exist libraries without valid static types. You can't install something from Maven or what-have-you that won't type-check. Is this enforced by the language, or is this just an aspect of the ecosystem? "Maven-packages must typecheck" is enforced by the spec? > But you can do this in Python. You can install something via pip and there is no guarantee it will come with good type annotations for your type-checking tool to use, because the type checker is not part of the language proper. It's not required. Are you saying that there is a guarantee in Java that the types need to be "good"? I'm not even clear that maven (which again isn't part of the java language) requires that uploads compile, much less that the type declarations be "good", whatever that means. Which all returns to my central point: you trust the java ecosystem more that the python ecosystem to have "good" type declarations. There is nothing implicit in the type systems of those languages that enforces that one or the other have better or worse type annotations. Your argument relies on conflating use in practice with theoretical guarantees, I'm just pointing that out. If you want to say that your experience is that python has less reliable types than java, then sure, that's probably true. But the type systems available in those languages are functionally equivalent. The use, however, differs.

DonaldPShimoda 6y ago
It really feels like your entire contribution to this discussion amounts to "but what if we ignore the point being made and instead just focus on very strict semantic interpretations of the language other people in the conversation are using". I feel like you have not really engaged with my actual points and instead have focused on finding details to complain about in service of appearing to make a point, which effectively derails the true conversation. I find this incredibly frustrating, and I have no interest in continuing. I would politely suggest you consider whether this is a common issue you have with people or whether it's just me (certainly a possibility, I admit). If this happens to you often, you may want to try alternative approaches to broaching your points if you'd like better engagement. I think most people don't enjoy when their main points are continually ignored in favor of bringing up other minutiae to prove that they're wrong or something. Regardless, cheers.

DonaldPShimoda 6y ago

It really feels like your entire contribution to this discussion amounts to "but what if we ignore the point being made and instead just focus on very strict semantic interpretations of the language other people in the conversation are using". I feel like you have not really engaged with my actual points and instead have focused on finding details to complain about in service of appearing to make a point, which effectively derails the true conversation. I find this incredibly frustrating, and I have no interest in continuing. I would politely suggest you consider whether this is a common issue you have with people or whether it's just me (certainly a possibility, I admit). If this happens to you often, you may want to try alternative approaches to broaching your points if you'd like better engagement. I think most people don't enjoy when their main points are continually ignored in favor of bringing up other minutiae to prove that they're wrong or something. Regardless, cheers.