• DWin@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Hey its better than nothing? Haha

    If performance isn’t an issue, I’d take it over nothing for long term support

    • MajorHavoc@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Yeah. I live to make fun of MyPy - or rather of Python for needing MyPy, but it’s “good enough” in many situations.

      • sping@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        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.

        • MajorHavoc@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          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.