undefined | Better HN

Skip to content

Top Best Ask Show New Jobs

0 points0x8BADF00D5y ago0 comments

Python has dynamic typing, which can be equally dangerous. In fact I’d argue it’s more dangerous. You will not throw errors until runtime, which will literally blow up in your face.

0 comments

8 comments · 4 top-level

ironmagma5y ago· 3 in thread

So does Bash, though.

sk0g5y ago

And Bash does not support static typing at all, unlike Python. Not sure what their argument even is.

ironmagma5y ago

Python doesn't support static typing either unless you're using mypy which is experimental. Bash and Python both however have strong types, although Bash's are weaker than Python's.

0x8BADF00DOP5y ago

Right, but Python gives you the illusion of safety. And the person I was replying to was trying to dismiss this interesting Ansible alternative because it was written in a language he doesn’t like.

pizza2345y ago· 1 in thread

> which can be equally dangerous

Bash is weakly typed, which is a different concept than dynamic typing.

Dynamically typed languages prevent bugs that weakly typed languages don't, so from this point of view, the latter are unambiguously "more dangerous" than the former.

0x8BADF00DOP5y ago

A dynamic type system is an incremental improvement over a weakly typed type system, and still will not guard against runtime errors. They are equally dangerous w.r.t runtime errors.

sk0g5y ago

It gives you the option to use static typing, if you so desire.

I'm not sure how not having a type system is safer than having a type system. What makes it feel more dangerous?

Too5y ago

When talking about Python in 2020 i think most people imply you are running Mypy, which does a very good job at statically analyzing python almost to strongly typed language level. Plus, as others said, weak and dynamic are not same thing.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse