Content deleted Content added
No edit summary |
explanation of type system cleanup |
||
Line 18:
I'm not sure if we should say that Python is strongly typed. It provides a lot of implicit conversions (eg, between numeric types, between string types) and makes common use of functions accepting any one of a group of related types (any sequence, or any 'file-like object'). It doesn't make it easy to derive a new type from an old one without making it compatible (eg, you can't easily make a new integer type which isn't comparable with the standard Integer). [[User:Matthew Woodcraft|Matthew Woodcraft]]
:This is true. Python has a large number of distinct types (integers, floats, long integers, bignums, complex, e.g.) but converts implicitly among them all. I suppose you could say that Python has a complicated system of types, but isn't "strongly typed" ... especially since a lot of folks read "strongly" as "statically". --[[User:Fubar Obfusco|FOo]]
-----
[[User:Hfastedge|Hfastedge]] -- ''Please'' take more care when editing this article. Your point that Python is dynamically typed has already been integrated with the article and does not need to be repeated. A few of your other points were erroneous or misleading, which is why they were removed. Please take the time to understand this and do not simply add them again.
Your statement that Python programs are "interpreted, not compiled" is simply false. Python -- like Java and Perl -- is a bytecode-compiled language. Compilation is implicit before execution of uncompiled scripts, which is why a new Python user might not have noticed its existence. However, it's there; it's how Python works; and yes, compiler errors are distinct from runtime errors. Compiled Python files have the extension <tt>.pyc</tt>, or <tt>.pyo</tt> if optimized. If you've never seen one, you haven't used Python for very long.
Python is a dynamically typed language, because that is how it is ''designed.'' It is neither a mistake nor an accident. Talking about this as if it is something suitable to "change" with a "paradigm shift" is not talking about Python, it is talking about your opinion of dynamic vs. static typing.
Your claims regarding "massive projects" vs. "rapid prototyping" are ill-advised in the light of the many massive projects that have been written quite successfully in dynamically typed languages (including Python). If you would like to discuss advantages and disadvantages that critics perceive in static and dynamic type-systems, you might want to do so on the pages for those subjects.
In addition, I suggest strongly that you study the writing style of other Wikipedia articles, as it will help you to integrate your work more fully with an article. You might particularly want to watch your use of links -- introducing a link with "here is:" is rough ''anywhere'' on the Web. Namespaces are not created lightly. Also, needless indentation turning a Wiki document into a piece of flat text are not desirable. --[[User:Fubar Obfusco|FOo]]
| |||