2016-08-12 1:10 GMT-07:00 Lawrence D’Oliveiro <lawrenced...@gmail.com>:
> On Thursday, August 11, 2016 at 8:33:41 AM UTC+12, Juan Pablo Romero > Méndez wrote: > > > I've been trying to find (without success so far) an example of a > situation > > where the dynamic features of a language like Python provides a clear > > advantage over languages with more than one type. > > I have used, and continue to use, both static and dynamic languages. > > With static languages, once a piece of code compiles without errors, you > have a slightly higher level of confidence in its correctness than with a > dynamic language. > > On the other hand, a dynamic language allows me to be much more > productive, because I have to write less code to begin with. > From your point of view, dynamic languages are more concise? > > The closest I can offer for an apples-to-apples comparison is PyCairo < > https://github.com/ldo/pycairo> versus Qahirah <https://github.com/ldo/ > qahirah>. Both are Python bindings for the Cairo graphics library; the > former is written in C as a Python extension module, the latter is done in > pure Python using ctypes. > > I didn’t write the former; I merely tried to rescue it from abandonment to > see if I could fill in a few more missing features. And what I found was, > it would be quicker to start again from scratch than to continue working on > it. > -- > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list > -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list