4 ms·

The programming languages that would make me the most sad/angry/annoyed I don't use, so it's difficult to make a choice. I suppose I'll have to go with Javascri

by lubutu 15y ago

The programming languages that would make me the most sad/angry/annoyed I don't use, so it's difficult to make a choice. I suppose I'll have to go with Javascript because it's the de facto 'Web language' which people use to force me to evaluate arbitrary code whenever I want to read anything on the Web. Even with a sandbox that seems a terrible idea. If we're talking about programming languages I hate but still use, I'd have to go with Python. I spend most of my time writing Haskell, and Python's dynamic typing puts me on edge. I might spend half an hour evaluating a Python script only for it to throw an AttributeError because I mistyped some function name or passed the wrong type. Does anyone know a static analysis tool for Python? I found one a while back but when I tried it it threw (you guessed it) an AttributeError on NoneType.

reinhardt 15y ago
pylint catches most such common errors.
- TillE 15y ago
  Editra with the PyStudio plugin has become my favorite development environment. It runs pylint every time you save a file and highlights lines with errors.
  - VMG 15y ago
    I believe vim + syntastic should do the same
shanemhansen 15y ago
Emacs with flymake mode or pycharm both do a great job at giving you real-time feedback on issues like that.
mumphster 15y ago
Sublimetext 2 + sublime lint plugin makes for a very nice python programming experience
bhickey 15y ago
I'm going to sign in as a partisan here. I firmly believe that Python is the worst language that people actually use. DuckTyping is the most deeply misguided aspect of python. With the discover of Hindley-Milner type inference 40 and 30 years ago, this sort of sloth is simply inexcusable. Pythonistas will say "Oh, I don't care if it's a duck or a swan, as long as it quacks." Guess what? You can treat function calls as a statement that an object is an instance of some typeclass and that typecheck that. With a sufficiently intelligent compiler/interpreter author this is transparent to the programmer.
- cpeterso 15y ago
  I enjoy Python's aesthetics and extensive libraries, but wish it had (practical) static type inference. (RPython isn't really practical.) And to confuse matters, Python 3 added optional type annotations that are ignored by the runtime!
- TylerE 15y ago
  With fairness, no you can't, not truly. Please point me to the version of HM the works with inheritance. Plus, due to stuff like __getattr__, the interpreter may not know until the method is called if it even exists. It would be totally possible in python to write a class where when any arbitrary method is called on a class, a function is randomly generated and called, with a random number of arguments, etc. It doesn't even have to be consistent from call to call. How on earth would H-M type inference cope with that?
  - bhickey 15y ago
    I never said inheritance, or method for that matter. You can do H-M on typeclasses. Philip Wadler has a paper on it and it's alive and well in GHC: http://homepages.inf.ed.ac.uk/wadler/topics/type-classes.html http://homepages.inf.ed.ac.uk/wadler/topics/type-classes.htm... The fact that Python allows you to do something absurd is simply an argument against its design. Edit: Uh oh, looks like I ruffled some snakeskin!
    - TylerE 15y ago

by lubutu 15y ago

reinhardt 15y ago

pylint catches most such common errors.

TillE 15y ago
Editra with the PyStudio plugin has become my favorite development environment. It runs pylint every time you save a file and highlights lines with errors.
- VMG 15y ago
  I believe vim + syntastic should do the same

shanemhansen 15y ago

Emacs with flymake mode or pycharm both do a great job at giving you real-time feedback on issues like that.

mumphster 15y ago

Sublimetext 2 + sublime lint plugin makes for a very nice python programming experience

bhickey 15y ago

I'm going to sign in as a partisan here. I firmly believe that Python is the worst language that people actually use. DuckTyping is the most deeply misguided aspect of python. With the discover of Hindley-Milner type inference 40 and 30 years ago, this sort of sloth is simply inexcusable. Pythonistas will say "Oh, I don't care if it's a duck or a swan, as long as it quacks." Guess what? You can treat function calls as a statement that an object is an instance of some typeclass and that typecheck that. With a sufficiently intelligent compiler/interpreter author this is transparent to the programmer.

cpeterso 15y ago
I enjoy Python's aesthetics and extensive libraries, but wish it had (practical) static type inference. (RPython isn't really practical.) And to confuse matters, Python 3 added optional type annotations that are ignored by the runtime!
TylerE 15y ago
With fairness, no you can't, not truly. Please point me to the version of HM the works with inheritance. Plus, due to stuff like __getattr__, the interpreter may not know until the method is called if it even exists. It would be totally possible in python to write a class where when any arbitrary method is called on a class, a function is randomly generated and called, with a random number of arguments, etc. It doesn't even have to be consistent from call to call. How on earth would H-M type inference cope with that?
- bhickey 15y ago
  I never said inheritance, or method for that matter. You can do H-M on typeclasses. Philip Wadler has a paper on it and it's alive and well in GHC: http://homepages.inf.ed.ac.uk/wadler/topics/type-classes.html http://homepages.inf.ed.ac.uk/wadler/topics/type-classes.htm... The fact that Python allows you to do something absurd is simply an argument against its design. Edit: Uh oh, looks like I ruffled some snakeskin!
  - TylerE 15y ago