/prog/ - python — World4ch

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-24 14:55

hi. I'm not a programmer or anything. I just know some PHP and the obligatory web developer bullshit. is Python a good language for a non programmer like me to start with? what's your expert opinion on this lang.?
thank you!

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-27 0:43

>>35,37
You can compile a dynamically typed language. 35's point may be that if you're going to go to the trouble of compiling a program beforehand, you might as well check for some common errors while you're at it.

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-27 1:04

>>41
A pretty silly point. If you're going to check for errors anyway, there's no reason to make yourself do extra work beforehand.

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-27 5:52

>>42
You may be thinking of languages like C++ and Java, where the type system requires excessive typing. Other languages have type inference, or less verbose syntax.

When you write code, you make mistakes and have to spend time fixing bugs. The static/dynamic choice is just a tradeoff between testing (for dynamic types) and writing type signatures (for static types).

On one extreme end of the spectrum are people like Ruby on Rails developers, who write shitty unit tests for everything and release buggy code. On the other extreme end are academics and people developing critical software who write proofs that their code is correct, they take forever but you can trust what they do.

At the end of the day, both sides did the "extra" work of checking their code and both sides got paid.

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-27 8:18

>>43
Well it's more than just tests vs types. Type checkers like the HM one will reject some valid programs as invalid. The static/dynamic debate rest on whether or not those programs that were rejected are useful ones to be able to express. I think they are, Haskellers don't.

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-27 13:14

>>43
No, I wasn't. Even in Haskell you have to indicate some types.

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-27 16:22

I like how OCaml combines an anal type system with nice features like different operators for integer and float arithmetics.
Way to help me be productive!

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-27 18:33

>>44
Type checkers like the HM one will reject some valid programs as invalid.
Everybody always says this, but I've never seen anyone give an example.

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-27 19:02

>>47
Of course one couldn't write an example in a language like Haskell, because a program that doesn't type check isn't valid haskell. The point is that, in general, Static typechecking is, I believe, equivalent to the halting problem and therefore undecidable.

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-27 19:29

#lang racket

(let ((b (even? (current-seconds)))) ((if b sqr string-length) (if b 3 "SICP")))

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-27 19:32

>>48
The example doesn't have to be in Haskell.

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-27 19:36

>>50
If you read again, you will see that it can't be written in Haskell. That's the point.

>>49
I imagine that counts. Same with a fully general version of 'apply'

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-27 20:20

>>51
it can't be written in Haskell.
What can't be?

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-27 20:22

>>52
Do I have to spell it out? You cannot write an example of a valid program that does not type check in Haskell, because a program that does not type check is not valid Haskell.

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-27 23:53

hurrrrr

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-28 1:59

>>53
You seem to have skipped a vital phase of the discussion. We don't yet have any "it" to write in Haskell.

Name: Anonymous 2010-09-28 6:44

>>1
I'm not a programmer or anything.
Like everyone in this board. We're just pretending all the time.

Name: Anonymous 2010-11-15 0:15

Newer Posts

python

1 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-24 14:55

41 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-27 0:43

42 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-27 1:04

43 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-27 5:52

44 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-27 8:18

45 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-27 13:14

46 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-27 16:22

47 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-27 18:33

48 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-27 19:02

49 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-27 19:29

50 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-27 19:32

51 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-27 19:36

52 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-27 20:20

53 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-27 20:22

54 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-27 23:53

55 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-28 1:59

56 Name: Anonymous 2010-09-28 6:44

57 Name: Anonymous 2010-11-15 0:15

58 Name: Anonymous 2013-01-19 23:48