• garlicandonions@lemmy.world
    2·
    6 hours ago

    It’s documentation. I’m a strickler to type in python so later when I look at my code and go what does this do it’s easier.

  • xthexder@l.sw0.com
    5·
    13 hours ago

    For NASA, data types don’t matter when you’re programming Voyager 1 and 45 years later it gets hit by an energy burst causing 3% of the RAM to become unusable, and it’s transmitting gibberish. It’s awesome they were able to recover it.

  • livingcoder@programming.dev
    21·
    1 day ago

    When I learned Python I thought that not having a statically typed language was the way to go, but then it just became an issue when I was trying to ensure that everything was at least something like what I was expecting. Going back to statically typed languages even harder with Rust has been a dream. I love it.

    • smiletolerantly@awful.systems
      5·
      12 hours ago

      I’m too lazy to insert the “look what they need to mimic a fraction of our power” meme here, so… Please imagine it instead.

      I’m switching jobs in a couple of months, and I am SO glad to be leaving a (very well maintained!!) python codebase with type hints and mypy for a rust codebase.

      It is just not the same.

      • zenforyen@feddit.org
        1·
        38 minutes ago

        Nice! I’d love to use Rust at work, I was a Haskell guy for hobby things, rather recently switched to Rust for that, and I enjoy it a lot. Taking 80% of the good lessons from functional programming while staying performant and practical and just have nice tooling - whoever designed Rust are wise people who know what is important for happy developers.

        My job is mainly C++, and if you have seen the bright side of life, it is difficult not to be frustrated by the language and tooling. I think C++ without clang-tidy is almost as horrible as Python without types and linters. Undefined behavior and foot guns everywhere!

      • Ethan@programming.devEnglish
        6·
        1 day ago

        “Assume it’s a map and treat like a map and then catch the type error if it’s not.” Paraphrased from actual advice by Guido on how you should write Python. Python isn’t a bad language but the philosophy that comes along with it is so fucked.

            • manicdave@feddit.uk
              2·
              13 hours ago

              Why though? I’ve genuinely never had a problem with it. If something is wrong, it was always going to be wrong. Why is it preferable to have to write a bunch of bolierplate than just deal with the stacktrace when you do encounter a type error?

    • Ethan@programming.devEnglish
      10·
      1 day ago

      Assembly languages are always architecture specific. Thats kind of their defining feature. Assembly is readable machine code.

      • h4x0r@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
        4·
        1 day ago

        nasm is an assembler though, not a ‘languages’, that only supports x86/x64. gas for example supports a wide range of architectures so you can write risc-v, arm, x64, etc.

        • Trailblazing Braille Taser@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          2·
          20 hours ago

          Are you arguing that assembly languages are not architecture-specific? I don’t think that’s the typical definition.

          Nasm is an assembler, but it also represents a specific assembly language targeting x86 architectures.

          Gas is an assembler of a higher order. It can emit code for many architectures, and thus it accepts many different architecture-specific assembly languages.