Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

> It surprises me that you are incapable of thinking one step ahead.

Seriously, what is this? You don't know me. Lay the fuck off.

My thoughts on the matter are either that a language should be strongly typed, with type declarations and enforcement at the compiler level, or dynamically typed in such a way that I shouldn't have to worry about types except for specific circumstances. Dynamically typed languages should know their coercion capabilities and perform them losslessly when needed. In reality what ends up happening is that some type coercions are automatic and some aren't, and if you're a polyglot then this is yet another one of those stupid arbitrary details you have to memorize for each language you work with. (I really would like less of those, there are too many different languages for doing the same thing)

One of the benefits of dynamic languages is that they handle type stuff for you. Which I interpret as, "cool, I don't have to worry about types!"

Yeah I know python is all about being obnoxiously explicit, and that is one of the things that I really do not like about that language. Now that I think about it maybe Python should have been strongly typed, its "no implicit behavior" opinion works much better under such a regime




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: