> Often the answer to this question unfortunately is not a technological merit, but knowledge of a team and willingness to learn.
And for the software engineer, this is also true:
> [it is] important ... to learn multiple programming languages
But I don't think the majority of python users are software engineers. They're data analysts, they're scientists, they're students. They'll never face a choice between Python and Rust, let's just be happy they chose Python over Matlab or Excel.
And with that in mind, writing Rust-shaped python so we can interoperate with our less-softwarey-brethren--while not the nirvana that we crave--is not a bad compromise.
100% this. As one of those people graduating from "Maker of Excel-abominations", I absolutely love that python can shape itself to my learning curve, while being useful the whole way through.
Articles like this expose people like me to concepts of typing that I never would get otherwise, and by practicing the concepts in python I might eventually be able to make the leap.
It's worth using a type checker for long enough to get a feel for how it can find bugs that would take you much longer to find at runtime. From there it's pretty easy to imagine how languages designed from the get-go to do this might do it even better.
It's also worth asking if the people who read your code are going to disengage when they see a big pile of type hints. It can be "better" in some abstract sense and still worse for the task at hand.
> Often the answer to this question unfortunately is not a technological merit, but knowledge of a team and willingness to learn.
And for the software engineer, this is also true:
> [it is] important ... to learn multiple programming languages
But I don't think the majority of python users are software engineers. They're data analysts, they're scientists, they're students. They'll never face a choice between Python and Rust, let's just be happy they chose Python over Matlab or Excel.
And with that in mind, writing Rust-shaped python so we can interoperate with our less-softwarey-brethren--while not the nirvana that we crave--is not a bad compromise.