Why make fun of it though? If you make typing and being checker-clean mandatory on a Python project, you get most of the benefits of static typing. The biggest hole is if the libraries you’re using aren’t properly type annotated. Perhaps I’d feel differently if the meat of my projects was the use of badly or un-typed packages, but thankfully it isn’t.
I would rather have a statically typed language with equivalent clarity, ease of use and extensive libraries, but the benefits of Python along with comprehensive, enforced type annotation are strong. Proper thread handling could be good, but since that forces you towards avoiding monolithic executables, and using asyncio (which is a delight to use), it’s almost a benefit.
Why make fun of it though? If you make typing and being checker-clean mandatory on a Python project, you get most of the benefits of static typing. The biggest hole is if the libraries you’re using aren’t properly type annotated. Perhaps I’d feel differently if the meat of my projects was the use of badly or un-typed packages, but thankfully it isn’t.
I would rather have a statically typed language with equivalent clarity, ease of use and extensive libraries, but the benefits of Python along with comprehensive, enforced type annotation are strong. Proper thread handling could be good, but since that forces you towards avoiding monolithic executables, and using asyncio (which is a delight to use), it’s almost a benefit.
That’s a good point. I do love options.
I’ll still jest a little at Pythons expense until a type system is natively available.
Having the option of not using types is great.
Having to go discover how to do basic typing in a 3rd party library is not great.
I adore Python, though - Right down to it’s painful Logging modules.