Python from Wise Guy's Viewpoint
Daniel C. Wang
danwang74 at hotmail.com
Wed Oct 29 22:44:12 EST 2003
More information about the Python-list mailing list
Wed Oct 29 22:44:12 EST 2003
- Previous message (by thread): Python from Wise Guy's Viewpoint
- Next message (by thread): Python from Wise Guy's Viewpoint
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Joe Marshall <jrm at ccs.neu.edu> writes: > I think the static typers will be agree (but probably not be happy > with) this statement: There exist programs that may dynamically admit > a correct solution for which static analyzers are unable to prove that > a correct solution exists. Agreed. However, if you allow the programer to explicitly guide the static analyzers with hints. I think that set of correct programs that are provablely correct under with a static analyzer and explicit programer hints, is very small. Type inference and type checking are different things. Inference will always be incomplete or undecidable in ways that are probably quite annoying. Type checking maybe be incomplete, but no more incomplete than modern mathematics.
- Previous message (by thread): Python from Wise Guy's Viewpoint
- Next message (by thread): Python from Wise Guy's Viewpoint
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Python-list mailing list