3 ms·
I bounced off of Python a few times before finally taking to it (at a time when I had no choice). I honestly believe that this situation has improved since Pyth
by mumblemumble 6y ago
I bounced off of Python a few times before finally taking to it (at a time when I had no choice). I honestly believe that this situation has improved since Python 3.5 or so, purely on the basis of improved standards of documentation, including many more libraries adding type hints to their public interfaces.
I've recently been back to Clojure, and it's the same old aggravation again. It seems that, oftentimes, the only way to know what arguments a function is prepared to accept is to already know what arguments a function is prepared to accept.
I don't want to come across as being too down on dynamic typing - I'm currently in the process of trying to get my company over to Python by any means necessary. What I really want to challenge is the idea, popular in many dynamic typing circles, that static types just get in the way. They can also serve to communicate essential information. If you aren't communicating that information through type annotations, then it's absolutely essential that you do it by some other means.
- ithrow 6y agoI don't want to come across as being too down on dynamic typing - I'm currently in the process of trying to get my company over to Python by any means necessary. Curious, from what and why? ML?