>Nonsense.>Python "generates" this: Traceback (most recent call last): File "/home/me/test.py", line 3, in <module> print(x[3]) ~^^^KeyError: 3
So? python generates that but the point was demonstrating type checking. The output you see is not generated by python. It's generated by an external type checker. The type checker caught the python exception without running any code.
>> The contents of a string can't be type checked […] Nonsense. This may be true for Python's type checking tools, but that's not a general limitation of type checking.
The context is python. We're talking about python. I'm making a statement about python. Nobody is talking about scala. I don't know why you're getting into scala stuff.
There is literally nothing in my statement to indicate I'm making a general statement about type checking. But I will say checking for the contents of a string is rare for a type checker to do. That is a general statement that is generally true.
>Some people have indeed infinite egos. If there would be just anything else besides that…
>I wonder every time why the most clueless are the loudest. That's so embarrassing.
Hey can you please stop being rude? The guy made factually incorrect statements and so did you. That's not an ego thing. It's just true that he's wrong. Everybody makes mistakes... people shouldn't get worked up about someone else identifying a mistake.
I too made a mistake. And I admitted my mistake. See my first couple of posts. I admitted I was wrong: the python interpreter doesn't do type checks. It was an error on my part for not clarifying I meant python development in general with external tools.
So? python generates that but the point was demonstrating type checking. The output you see is not generated by python. It's generated by an external type checker. The type checker caught the python exception without running any code.
>> The contents of a string can't be type checked […] Nonsense. This may be true for Python's type checking tools, but that's not a general limitation of type checking.
The context is python. We're talking about python. I'm making a statement about python. Nobody is talking about scala. I don't know why you're getting into scala stuff.
There is literally nothing in my statement to indicate I'm making a general statement about type checking. But I will say checking for the contents of a string is rare for a type checker to do. That is a general statement that is generally true.
>Some people have indeed infinite egos. If there would be just anything else besides that… >I wonder every time why the most clueless are the loudest. That's so embarrassing.
Hey can you please stop being rude? The guy made factually incorrect statements and so did you. That's not an ego thing. It's just true that he's wrong. Everybody makes mistakes... people shouldn't get worked up about someone else identifying a mistake.
I too made a mistake. And I admitted my mistake. See my first couple of posts. I admitted I was wrong: the python interpreter doesn't do type checks. It was an error on my part for not clarifying I meant python development in general with external tools.