4 ms·
You're entirely forgetting the benefits. 1) Scientists, hobbyists etc. can be super productive with Python while disregarding types. 2) Software developers ca
by gypsyharlot 6y ago
You're entirely forgetting the benefits.
1) Scientists, hobbyists etc. can be super productive with Python while disregarding types.
2) Software developers can write serious applications with type checking.
Statically typed languages exclude group that benefit from 1).
- pansa2 6y agoA language that tries to satisfy both of these groups won’t be ideal for either of them. Python should aim to be perfect for group 1. There are many other languages that will always be a better choice for group 2.
- gypsyharlot 6y agoI disagree. You can spend 90% of your time doing e.g. data science, and then one day you need to integrate with a DB or make a cross-platform desktop GUI application, as an example. Should you learn C++ (it takes a decade to become a very mediocre C++-developer), or Java to write a desktop GUI application? No, there isn't "always" a better choice for group 2. - Most software isn't CPU bound, so that defies "always" in your argument - You need libraries get things done What language would you always pick for group 2? Or would you pick a different one for each task, spending an order of magnitude more time learning them?