Re the typing point: Statements like "Python is more strongly-typed than Java" can mean too many different things without a precise definition of what "strongl

Re the typing point: Statements like "Python is more strongly-typed than Java" can mean too many different things without a precise definition of what "strongly-typed" means. The Wikipedia page linked from the article even supports the position that there isn't an accepted definition for the strong vs. weak! (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_system#.22Strong.22_and_.22weak.22_type_systems https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_system#.22Strong.22_and_....) These terms are not very illuminating, and I don't understand the post's argument about types as a result, especially w.r.t None vs. null. One argument that the post might be making, and I'd like to see fleshed out, is "Python's expressions and built-in operators check their inputs at runtime in a way that gives useful and effective error messages in practice." That seems like a lesson from experience that could be backed up with anecdotes and provide some useful feedback on the language. That avoids the terminology debate about types, which is more about picking definitions than about the quality of the language for certain purposes. It does require defining "useful and effective" for error messages, but I'm more interested in that debate :-)