Re: How a smart editor could make Postfix type declarations PEP3117 in Python3000 more readable
aspineux a écrit : Hi I read the PEP 3117 about the new Postfix type declarations in Python3000. THIS PEP as been REJECTED ! Indeed - it's an april's fool joke !-) And BTW, no need to scream, we hear you pretty well. But ... The notation in the PEP is very ugly ! This make python code more difficult to read! Anyway when I switched to python (from C, C++, ..), I suffered a lot of the untyped python variables. And I think this is a good idea to include typing in python. The concept of type greatly differs between static typing and dynamic typing. FWIW, it also somewhat differs between declarative static type systems (C/C++/Java/etc) and inference-based static type systems (OCaml, Haskell etc). Anyway, Python is dynamically typed (FWIW, it's dynamic almost everywhere), and this is probably not going to change in a foreseeable future. So I guess you'd better learn to use dynamic typing instead of trying to write C++ in Python - or, if you just can't get used to dynamic typing, use another language. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: How a smart editor could make Postfix type declarations PEP3117 in Python3000 more readable
On Jan 5, 4:39 am, aspineux [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi I read the PEP 3117 about the new Postfix type declarations in Python3000. THIS PEP as been REJECTED ! But ... The notation in the PEP is very ugly ! This make python code more difficult to read! Anyway when I switched to python (from C, C++, ..), I suffered a lot of the untyped python variables. And I think this is a good idea to include typing in python. Then I get this idea: The editor could hide the typing notation, just displaying hint ! It could also auto-complete the type of any variable having already a type in the current function, and underline untyped variable or variable having multiple type inside the function. Just an idea ! And to go further the editor could do all the job of type checking, using formatted comment to specify type, like in some existing embedded documentation. But then we are losing the brevity provided by the PEP. Pydev (and certainly other) already does some interesting work to find mistyped (typed like in I made a typo) variable name. TO ALL NEW IDEA RESISTANT : Hopefully, in 1990 nobody said to someone that inventing a language where bloc definition is based on indentation was a s Regards Alain Spineux Happy new year. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Language type systems (was: How a smart editor could make Postfix type declarations PEP3117 in Python3000 more readable)
John Nagle [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: (I'm writing as someone who's used and liked very strictly typed languages like Ada and Modula. Python is strictly typed (also known as strongly typed URL:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strongly-typed), because its objects know exactly what type they are and won't contort themselves into another type unless there's an explicitly defined method for doing so. I think you mean you're accustomed to statically-typed languages, where names are restricted at compile-time in what values they can refer to. This is as opposed to Python being a dynamically-typed language: names are not restricted in the type of object they can be bound to, and the type of a value is determined when that value is created URL:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_system#Type_checking. Python actually does unusually well without declarations. Most languages that don't have declarations run into difficulties. Consider Basic, TCL, and Matlab, to name three rather diverse examples. Python managed to avoid the problems those languages have.) Those three diverse examples are all weakly typed languages. Since Python is strongly-typed and dynamically-typed, this could largely explain the difference you see in Python doing unusually well without declarations compared to those languages. -- \It is the responsibility of intellectuals to tell the truth | `\and expose lies. -- Noam Chomsky | _o__) | Ben Finney -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: Language type systems (was: How a smart editor could make Postfix type declarations PEP3117 in Python3000 more readable)
Since Python is strongly-typed and dynamically-typed, this -- Hyphenating after ly is grammatically incorrect. \It is the responsibility of intellectuals to tell the truth | `\and expose lies. -- Noam Chomsky Never quote Noam Chomsky on truth. He wouldn't know it if it bit him. Nice post otherwise. I'm just fooling around. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: How a smart editor could make Postfix type declarations PEP3117 in Python3000 more readable
On Jan 5, 7:07 am, John Nagle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Python doesn't really need explicit type declarations. They're not needed for correctness, and they're not needed for performance. Take a look at Shed Skin, which is able to hard-compile Python using type inference without explicit type declarations. ShedSkin is not Python. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
How a smart editor could make Postfix type declarations PEP3117 in Python3000 more readable
Hi I read the PEP 3117 about the new Postfix type declarations in Python3000. THIS PEP as been REJECTED ! But ... The notation in the PEP is very ugly ! This make python code more difficult to read! Anyway when I switched to python (from C, C++, ..), I suffered a lot of the untyped python variables. And I think this is a good idea to include typing in python. Then I get this idea: The editor could hide the typing notation, just displaying hint ! It could also auto-complete the type of any variable having already a type in the current function, and underline untyped variable or variable having multiple type inside the function. Just an idea ! Alain Spineux Happy new year. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: How a smart editor could make Postfix type declarations PEP3117 in Python3000 more readable
On Fri, 04 Jan 2008 19:39:13 -0800, aspineux wrote: Hi I read the PEP 3117 about the new Postfix type declarations in Python3000. THIS PEP as been REJECTED ! But ... The notation in the PEP is very ugly ! This make python code more difficult to read! Please look at the date on the PEP: http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-3117/ -- Steven -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: How a smart editor could make Postfix type declarations PEP3117 in Python3000 more readable
aspineux wrote: Hi I read the PEP 3117 about the new Postfix type declarations in Python3000. THIS PEP as been REJECTED ! Of course. That was a joke. And I think this is a good idea to include typing in python. Python doesn't really need explicit type declarations. They're not needed for correctness, and they're not needed for performance. Take a look at Shed Skin, which is able to hard-compile Python using type inference without explicit type declarations. (I'm writing as someone who's used and liked very strictly typed languages like Ada and Modula. Python actually does unusually well without declarations. Most languages that don't have declarations run into difficulties. Consider Basic, TCL, and Matlab, to name three rather diverse examples. Python managed to avoid the problems those languages have.) John Nagle -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Re: How a smart editor could make Postfix type declarations PEP3117 in Python3000 more readable
On Jan 4, 10:07 pm, John Nagle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: aspineux wrote: Hi I read the PEP 3117 about the new Postfix type declarations in Python3000. THIS PEP as been REJECTED ! Of course. That was a joke. And I think this is a good idea to include typing in python. Python doesn't really need explicit type declarations. They're not needed for correctness, and they're not needed for performance. Take a look at Shed Skin, which is able to hard-compile Python using type inference without explicit type declarations. (I'm writing as someone who's used and liked very strictly typed languages like Ada and Modula. Python actually does unusually well without declarations. Most languages that don't have declarations run into difficulties. Consider Basic, TCL, and Matlab, to name three rather diverse examples. Python managed to avoid the problems those languages have.) John Nagle Interesting. And how did it do that? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
