faq
flatforty
contribute
subscribe
configure
search
rdf
main
parent
thread
|
Re: What bindings in general need is:
by Corbin on Monday 20/Sep/2004, @14:06
|
What about at like the start of the Python script you some way declare that all variables must be declared. And then create a new 'dynamic' type so in case you want some variable to still be dynamic and all it could be. Also if in the start it isn't declared that all variables must be declared, it acts like it does now.
That way everyone wins! I think... |
|
|
The Fine Print: The following comments
are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )
|
Re: What bindings in general need is:
by Philippe Fremy on Monday 20/Sep/2004, @14:16
|
Well, say that go Guido ! Next time I'll interview him, I'll ask for sure :-)
(shameless plug: http://www.freehackers.org/fosdem2002/guido.html)
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: What bindings in general need is:
by Rayiner Hashem on Monday 20/Sep/2004, @17:14
|
That's not unlike what soft-typing languages do. In those languages (Common Lisp, many Schemes, Dylan), a type declaration is an optional constraint. If you put it in, it can help the compiler optimize the code, and check for errors. If you leave t out, you can still use full dynamicity. The usual development style with such languages is you write your "prototype" in a fully-dynamic, general manner, and then gradually convert that into your production code by adding declarations, refactoring, and optimizing.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: What bindings in general need is:
by Shulai on Monday 20/Sep/2004, @18:26
|
That's in my list of reasons I not really like python.
Also you can count the sloppy OO style, and even the tabbed blocks, even admitting it is nice to force people to write cleaner code).
I like more Pike, sadly it is soooo unknown and underused...
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
The Fine Print: The previous
comments are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )
|
|
![[KDE Dot News]](http://www.kde.org/dot/Images/kdedotnews.gif)
