[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Magnus Lycka wrote: > >>The static typing means that you either have to make several >>implementations of many algorithms, or you need to work with >>those convoluted templates that were added to the language as >>an afterthought. > > I don't see this in Haskell.
No, I was refering to C++ when I talked about templates. I don't really know Haskell, so I can't really compare it to Python. A smarter compiler can certainly infer types from the code and assemble several implementations of an algorithm, but unless I'm confused, this makes it difficult to do the kind of dynamic linking / late binding that we do in Python. How do you compile a dynamic library without locking library users to specific types? I don't doubt that it's possible to make a statically typed language much less assembly like than C++... -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list