Do you work at the majority of companies? I can tell you that I’ve worked with code bases from each of the FAANG companies that don’t use type checking, because it’s optional. Anything that’s optional in a language will not be ubiquitous
Your statements are incongruent with the reality of production.
I've likely worked for more companies then you in the last 5 years or so due to my personality. I don't stay at one place for long. Actually I've probably worked for more in my entire career, but only the last 5 years should be relevant.
Even so where I worked is only part of the equation. You can look up which companies use python types in a google search.
Let me add more nuance, companies that use python as glue code as in scripting languages don't use types. This makes sense as python is considered not as important as the main language.
For companies that are primarily based on python... the majority use types. The ones that don't are actively migrating. This includes faang and subsidiaries. In fact type checkers for python are likely to be built by faang or companies close to that tier.
I’m unsure how you can so confidently make that assertion.
Even at companies that do use type hints, there’ll be tons of legacy code that won’t (and probably tons of new code as well if we’re being realistic).
It’s like saying every company uses bash scripts. It’s not really indicative of the prevalence in actual code bases in production use other than saying it may be used somewhere within the company.
Between this and your other comments, you’re making very widespread comments that can’t logically apply to everything and nor do they in my experience.
>Even at companies that do use type hints, there’ll be tons of legacy code that won’t (and probably tons of new code as well if we’re being realistic).
The first part is true, I agree with that assessment and I never made a contrary claim. Companies are migrating.
The second part in parenthesis, is less common, I don't agree that it's a generality among companies that have python as a primary language.
>It’s like saying every company uses bash scripts. It’s not really indicative of the prevalence in actual code bases in production use other than saying it may be used somewhere within the company.
I don't even know what you're getting at with this example. Tons of companies use python "somehwhere" within the company. I'm sure in those cases it's often not typed.
But for companies or teams that use python as a primary it's typically typed or in the process of getting migrated to be typed. That is the nuance I added to my claim.
>Between this and your other comments, you’re making very widespread comments that can’t logically apply to everything and nor do they in my experience.
Except you made statements that are factually wrong. I literally ran mypy on some code and your statements were categorically incorrect from your other comment. Usually these debates are anecdotal so logic doesn't apply as it's just fuzzy opinions regarding social aspects of society. But that's not the case here. You made factually incorrect statements and that has bearing on the correctness of your anecdotal statements too.
Your statements are incongruent with the reality of production.