On Fri, Feb 20, 2009 at 3:28 PM, Joshua Kugler <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:joshua@joshuakugler.com" target="_blank">joshua@joshuakugler.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="gmail_quote"><div class="Ih2E3d"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Miguel Lobo wrote:<br>
> I'm also interested in this, but from a different angle. For large<br>
> projects, how much of a problem is the lack of static checks of the<br>
> kind that would be performed by a C/C++ compiler?</blockquote></div></div></blockquote><div><br>This is a great question. All Python programmers know the answer: the
lack of static checks is much less important than you would imagine.<br><br>
For Python, you can run pylint from time to time to perform lint-like
"static" checks. They are often useful. But most of the time, when I
make a programming mistake, Python politely tells me about it.<br><br>
Proper unit tests that cover code also reduce the importance of static checks.<br><br>But the point is this: you will be shocked at how little static checks matter.<br><br>Edward</div></div>--------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
Edward K. Ream email: <a href="mailto:edreamleo@gmail.com">edreamleo@gmail.com</a><br>Leo: <a href="http://webpages.charter.net/edreamleo/front.html">http://webpages.charter.net/edreamleo/front.html</a><br>--------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
<br>