5 ms·
That's not remotely a fair characterization of what TFA says about Python: > This is intentionally a fairly narrow definition. Some examples of things that are
by cryptonector 3y ago
That's not remotely a fair characterization of what TFA says about Python:
> This is intentionally a fairly narrow definition. Some examples of things that are not "type systems":
> Python's type system: Dynamic languages like Python do local type checks to establish global safety properties. However, the type checks are not done purely on the program's source code before running it, but examine the actual runtime inputs as well.
It does not say "python is strongly typed but [...]", not even "python is strongly typed". The words "strong", "strongly", and "strength" do not even appear. TFA says that Python being dynamic means it is not type-checked at compilation time -- that's practically the same as saying the opposite of "python is strongly typed" for most people's intended meaning of "strongly typed".
- Jtsummers 3y ago> TFA says that Python being dynamic means it is not type-checked at compilation time -- that's practically the same as saying the opposite of "python is strongly typed" for most people's intended meaning of "strongly typed". Strong typing is a weak concept (pun intended). The most useful meaning is, roughly, no or little automatic type coercion (so a numeric tower might still be "strong", but coercing a string "1" into the number 1 is "weak"; `"1" + 1` => `"2"`). Anyone who uses "strong typing" as synonymous with "static typing" is making a very silly mistake.
- cryptonector 3y agoI'm trying to understand what GP meant by "strong" here. TFA doesn't say anything about "strength" of typing.