Your argument was that static typing is necessary to create a language with restrictions which prevent misuse of interfaces. That means inheritable typing (i.e. class inheritance, where you define and explicitly use a class or its descendents which inherit its interface), but not duck typing (i.e. where you shove something at it, and as long as it reacts in a meaningful and appropriate way to the same way to the same member calls and provides the same attributes and other interfaces then it's correct).
Duck typing is a piece of technical jargon; it's not a lay-term. Duck typing is a term similar to "Floating Point Unit" and dissimilar from "Math coprocessor" (which is still kind of jargony but eh).
In any case, you seem to be arguing that the specific set of code verification afforded by a specific subset of static checking (that being compile-time checking) is required for code quality reasons, without accepting any other form of verification.
To take this down to a risk management level, you're attempting to partially mitigate the risk of improper type usage with standard interfaces (a subset of "bad code" risk) in high-importance applications (SMS application, e-mail application, Contacts, etc.) by using compile-time type checking with a statically typed language. I believe you're over-estimating the risk, as your risk domain is limited to core applications and interfaces which are subject to extra scrutiny including extensive testing and code verification. The resources expended on these applications are high enough that creating and using a static checker and taking up coding practices to enable higher accuracy from the static checker in high-importance code paths would be a reasonable additional expenditure (remember, they did write their own JVM for the Android system), allowing for further mitigation if desired.
These risk considerations are interesting because you can consider the accessibility of Python as a risk: Python is easy to code in, and easy to debug, and easily portable; this could have marketing impacts or code quality impacts (i.e. if code written in Python by equally skilled parties expending equal resources is more likely to have fewer defects than code written in Java, then Python has lower code quality risk; this is a primary argument against C and C++, with many considering these languages magnets for bugs and feeling that similar skill will produce more defect-free Java or C# or Python code than C or C++ code).
As a final note: I can convert most strategic arguments (like the decision between which language to use) into risk evaluation; I can't necessarily evaluate that risk, as it requires expert judgment. The evaluation of Python versus Java would require not only a deep understanding of each language, but also of the use of each language: knowledge of strengths and weaknesses in complex programming tasks equivalent to the tasks undertaken in the target environment are required, as well as practical comparisons of defect rate both for similarly skilled programmers and in general (because i.e. maybe Python produces fewer bugs from decent Python programmers; but maybe there's more Java programmers at a reasonable level, and so most programmers would be Python n00bs that write shitty Python code). Further, mitigation may be possible with additional effort, as I've pointed out with the potential to use and even directly accommodate static checkers; this definitely affects risk.
(I can convert most technical and strategic arguments and decisions into a variety of things--strategic evaluation is something I have a lot of tools for; it helps to examine stuff from every angle you can.)
Ah, so the issue isn't that there isn't strong typing; it's that the compiler for a C or Java app runs through the code and cross-verifies types, while in Python you don't have a static checker. Python's duck-typing makes it difficult to write a static checker, and so you would get only limited success: You'd have to follow each possible branch and determine if a value could get initialized to something else, and raise an error on an absolute yes.
In other words: your argument is that any language with duck typing is inherently wrong for any application that people are expected to use.
What is "system-level programming"? Is the graphics system written in Java? Of course not; it's C++. SMS application? That's in Java; it's an application. Dialer application? Java, it's an application.
Unless you want to start expanding "System level programming" to include "Web browsers and e-mail applications", Android's system is not in Java.
That is your argument or the argument of an idiot whom you follow.
This was the argument made:
Great idea! Let's implement everything on our phone in an incredibly slow, dynamically typed language, whose only relevant implementation has a GIL and a pathetically bad concurrency model!
I could argue about whether he's flat wrong about Python being slow or having bad concurrency; or I could cite that Google wrote their own JVM.
Why? Because you can not define typesafe the interfaces in Python to:
-- the address book
-- the calendar
-- the text message system
If you try to do this in python:
apple = "apple"
apple = 5
Python throws an error because "apple" is of type "string". Python is strongly typed, but it's dynamically typed: once you define a variable, it gets an unchanging type. Assigning another type to that variable is not allowed.
class AddressBook:
name = str("")
phonenumber = int(0)
Create a class as so and your class is type-strong. Not to mention Python has a robust implementation of C and C++ binding in both directions, so you can bind C++ APIs to Python in a type-safe manner. Still, the Address Book and Calendar and such are likely written in Java, and thus in our thought experiment would be in Python; you would define the classes to carry certain types of data directly in Python, not bind to a back-end C library.
"Catastrophic Coverage" is what's called a "High Deductable Health Plan"; for your employer, it's a "Consumer Driven Health Plan". You have a high ($1,500 or so) deductible and a reasonable out-of-pocket maximum ($3,500, $4,000, $5,400, etc.). No prescription coverage. Often these plans do include wellness coverage, but non-wellness plans are out there too; wellness coverage is becoming popular because it reduces insurance company risk.
Sans-wellness, you can get one for ~$200. With wellness, $300 and up.
Who treats a rash with medical care? And besides, these HDHPs don't cover that; if you show up at the clinic for poison ivy and a Prednizone prescription, you pay for that out of pocket. If you show up for appendicitis and it costs $1300 for xrays and surgery, you pay for that out of pocket.
Google wrote their own JVM because the JVM is a piece of shit that wouldn't work. They use a different bytecode completely incompatible with Java JVM bytecode. Uncompressed Dalvik is smaller than compressed JAR for the same Java class. It's also faster, and consumes less RAM.
It's an application programming language, not a system programming language. Android is a Linux system written in C and C++ mostly.
The argument was that the current Python implementation wasn't good enough; the counter-argument is that neither was Java, since Google wrote their own and use a different bytecode. (Oracle sued Google because Google "java" wasn't real "Java").
I said the package manager does it. When you run Python, it generates the.pyc and.pyo files for modules loaded:
Each time you install a Python module, the package manager runs Python to load it as a privileged user
The.pyc and.pyo files for system libraries are generated at installation time, because a non-privileged user running a Python application wouldn't be able to store those files in a system-wide location (for good reason: you could store malicious ones and jump across security zones by injecting code into other users' applications by replacing some runtime files with new ones that get loaded the next time they use that application).
Python is a strongly-typed language, which I like; Perl is a mess. I like how Python will compile-check and then runtime-check, is easy to test, and will throw an exception and traceback for the tiniest thing that any sane language should sensibly handle. You mean I can't pass a number as a string to be printed, I have to str() it? Idiot language, Perl automatically knows that!... but then again Perl applications never work and are impossible to debug...
That's far better than what I can get quoted, and I've been offered no subsidy. I'm trying to get a college student to get herself some insurance with an HSA; she takes care of herself and never goes to the doctors ever, so I figured an HDHP like I have (I have a CDHP through my employer) with an HSA option and Wellness coverage would be good. Holy crap the options are expensive and it's a bring-your-own-money plan >:|
Actually, Python is strong-dynamic-duck-typed and pre-compiles. Each time you install a Python module, the package manager runs Python to load it as a privileged user--which automatically generates a.pyc and a.pyo compiled native object in the module directory. There are many further implementations of Python (including the ridiculous Pypy, a Python interpreter written in Python) that are compatible with the language; Google supplies Dalvik, a Google-written implementation of Java, so I fail to see why it's any huge obstacle for them to have supplied a Google-written implementation of Python instead.
Java was used for strategic reasons, not technical reasons.
Get paid very little to... go out and put on a political show that has no impact on our lives and safety aside from destroying our economy and creating a lot of panic so that our public servants can seize power and get us to call them "leaders".
It's not forbidden and it's implied by the Constitution's reference to patents and copyright that Congress is expected to support the advances of the arts and sciences. This to me implies that it's expected that individual states will fund technological advancements in their own state.
The plans are too expensive for poor people. This government healthcare stuff has made healthcare much, much more expensive. I mean back in the day I had a $10 deductible with full coverage for everything and I paid $348/mo. Now I'm paying $20/mo for my employer-supplied CDHP that gives me an HSA I can add $3500 per year to pre-tax, meaning I save about 30% on everything from bandages and antihistamines to Target clinic visits and emergency surgery. On top of that, the HSA covers anything beyond a $3,500 per-anum maximum: if I get cancer or break a bone or whatnot, I pay $3,500 and they pay everything (my deductible is $1500, but it goes toward this $3,500 maximum). They do pay 100% of any wellness service I contract--a doctor's visit for a check-up, physical, vaccinations, other preventative care is covered absolutely and I pay $0.
For the privilege of managing your own risk and being immune to sudden ridiculously high health care expenses beyond $5,500 per annum, while paying for absolutely everything yourself, you need to pay... $194/mo on the open market. Seriously. HDHP for an individual is about $200/mo. The cost of a plan with Wellness benefits (the insurance company pays for you to get regular check-ups and vaccinations to avoid the eventuality of paying out when you fall severely ill) and a $3,500 per-annum out-of-pocket maximum is around $300/mo. They charge you $200/mo to have a savings account and $300/mo to get two $75 doctor's office visits and a $15 flu vaccination for free.
The risk should be substantially lower if they supply clinical services. Some modern HMOs are as low as $70/mo and they have actual coverage. How in the fuck are no-coverage HDHPs $200/mo?!
I have actually argued for $800 toilet seats at my place of work. Once I was unable to hold out past 2pm, so I used the company facilities--and HALF a roll of toilet paper. Half the roll. Not only did I clog the toilet, but that evening when I showered it was quite painful due to a nasty rash I'd developed from improper hygiene.
My bathroom comes equipped with a shower, which I use when hygiene is required. You wouldn't fist your hands into a pile of cow manure and then wipe off with a paper towel before you prepare dinner, now would you? Why public facilities aren't equipped with the correct hygiene products is beyond me and, frankly, disturbing as all hell.
A lot tougher to get right than software. In software you can implement anything you want, as badly as you want. It doesn't cost anything and it's easy to start over.
They're not "Trying". Filibuster is a Republican artform; they *will* defund Obamacare with this tactic. They don't even have to rotate people at a podium for this one; they'll just wait for the Democrats to get tired of a government shutdown and concede.
Galaxy Nexus was a Samsung based on the Samsung Galaxy, not sure which (I think the G2). Nexus 4 was another LG phone but I don't follow them so can't call out the model.
Wait until NOW and the Feminazi Organization of America get a hold of this study. They can tear it apart explaining how women aren't any more emotional or irrational than men. (It's been scientifically shown that the emotion and reason centers of the brain override each other--using logic numbs emotion, and emotional reactions numb logic)
Perhaps. My point is that thousands of years of geological stress buildup were released two years ago. You're not going to get much of a bang for a while.
Slashdot Mirror
Your argument was that static typing is necessary to create a language with restrictions which prevent misuse of interfaces. That means inheritable typing (i.e. class inheritance, where you define and explicitly use a class or its descendents which inherit its interface), but not duck typing (i.e. where you shove something at it, and as long as it reacts in a meaningful and appropriate way to the same way to the same member calls and provides the same attributes and other interfaces then it's correct).
Duck typing is a piece of technical jargon; it's not a lay-term. Duck typing is a term similar to "Floating Point Unit" and dissimilar from "Math coprocessor" (which is still kind of jargony but eh).
In any case, you seem to be arguing that the specific set of code verification afforded by a specific subset of static checking (that being compile-time checking) is required for code quality reasons, without accepting any other form of verification.
To take this down to a risk management level, you're attempting to partially mitigate the risk of improper type usage with standard interfaces (a subset of "bad code" risk) in high-importance applications (SMS application, e-mail application, Contacts, etc.) by using compile-time type checking with a statically typed language. I believe you're over-estimating the risk, as your risk domain is limited to core applications and interfaces which are subject to extra scrutiny including extensive testing and code verification. The resources expended on these applications are high enough that creating and using a static checker and taking up coding practices to enable higher accuracy from the static checker in high-importance code paths would be a reasonable additional expenditure (remember, they did write their own JVM for the Android system), allowing for further mitigation if desired.
These risk considerations are interesting because you can consider the accessibility of Python as a risk: Python is easy to code in, and easy to debug, and easily portable; this could have marketing impacts or code quality impacts (i.e. if code written in Python by equally skilled parties expending equal resources is more likely to have fewer defects than code written in Java, then Python has lower code quality risk; this is a primary argument against C and C++, with many considering these languages magnets for bugs and feeling that similar skill will produce more defect-free Java or C# or Python code than C or C++ code).
As a final note: I can convert most strategic arguments (like the decision between which language to use) into risk evaluation; I can't necessarily evaluate that risk, as it requires expert judgment. The evaluation of Python versus Java would require not only a deep understanding of each language, but also of the use of each language: knowledge of strengths and weaknesses in complex programming tasks equivalent to the tasks undertaken in the target environment are required, as well as practical comparisons of defect rate both for similarly skilled programmers and in general (because i.e. maybe Python produces fewer bugs from decent Python programmers; but maybe there's more Java programmers at a reasonable level, and so most programmers would be Python n00bs that write shitty Python code). Further, mitigation may be possible with additional effort, as I've pointed out with the potential to use and even directly accommodate static checkers; this definitely affects risk.
(I can convert most technical and strategic arguments and decisions into a variety of things--strategic evaluation is something I have a lot of tools for; it helps to examine stuff from every angle you can.)
Male, 15-19. Trojans, 20% discount!
Male, 20-28. Durex, 20% discount!
Female, 15-28. Pepper spray, 5% discount!
Female, 35-55. T-Shirt, I am a Cougar, 35% discount!
Duck-typing is a special type of dynamic typing. It's inherently not static typing.
Ah, so the issue isn't that there isn't strong typing; it's that the compiler for a C or Java app runs through the code and cross-verifies types, while in Python you don't have a static checker. Python's duck-typing makes it difficult to write a static checker, and so you would get only limited success: You'd have to follow each possible branch and determine if a value could get initialized to something else, and raise an error on an absolute yes.
In other words: your argument is that any language with duck typing is inherently wrong for any application that people are expected to use.
What is "system-level programming"? Is the graphics system written in Java? Of course not; it's C++. SMS application? That's in Java; it's an application. Dialer application? Java, it's an application.
Unless you want to start expanding "System level programming" to include "Web browsers and e-mail applications", Android's system is not in Java.
That is your argument or the argument of an idiot whom you follow.
This was the argument made:
Great idea! Let's implement everything on our phone in an incredibly slow, dynamically typed language, whose only relevant implementation has a GIL and a pathetically bad concurrency model!
I could argue about whether he's flat wrong about Python being slow or having bad concurrency; or I could cite that Google wrote their own JVM.
Why? Because you can not define typesafe the interfaces in Python to:
-- the address book
-- the calendar
-- the text message system
If you try to do this in python:
apple = "apple"
apple = 5
Python throws an error because "apple" is of type "string". Python is strongly typed, but it's dynamically typed: once you define a variable, it gets an unchanging type. Assigning another type to that variable is not allowed.
class AddressBook:
name = str("")
phonenumber = int(0)
Create a class as so and your class is type-strong. Not to mention Python has a robust implementation of C and C++ binding in both directions, so you can bind C++ APIs to Python in a type-safe manner. Still, the Address Book and Calendar and such are likely written in Java, and thus in our thought experiment would be in Python; you would define the classes to carry certain types of data directly in Python, not bind to a back-end C library.
Catastrophic Coverage is $194/mo.
"Catastrophic Coverage" is what's called a "High Deductable Health Plan"; for your employer, it's a "Consumer Driven Health Plan". You have a high ($1,500 or so) deductible and a reasonable out-of-pocket maximum ($3,500, $4,000, $5,400, etc.). No prescription coverage. Often these plans do include wellness coverage, but non-wellness plans are out there too; wellness coverage is becoming popular because it reduces insurance company risk.
Sans-wellness, you can get one for ~$200. With wellness, $300 and up.
What the fuck sense does that make?
Who treats a rash with medical care? And besides, these HDHPs don't cover that; if you show up at the clinic for poison ivy and a Prednizone prescription, you pay for that out of pocket. If you show up for appendicitis and it costs $1300 for xrays and surgery, you pay for that out of pocket.
Google wrote their own JVM because the JVM is a piece of shit that wouldn't work. They use a different bytecode completely incompatible with Java JVM bytecode. Uncompressed Dalvik is smaller than compressed JAR for the same Java class. It's also faster, and consumes less RAM.
It's an application programming language, not a system programming language. Android is a Linux system written in C and C++ mostly.
The argument was that the current Python implementation wasn't good enough; the counter-argument is that neither was Java, since Google wrote their own and use a different bytecode. (Oracle sued Google because Google "java" wasn't real "Java").
I said the package manager does it. When you run Python, it generates the .pyc and .pyo files for modules loaded:
Each time you install a Python module, the package manager runs Python to load it as a privileged user
The .pyc and .pyo files for system libraries are generated at installation time, because a non-privileged user running a Python application wouldn't be able to store those files in a system-wide location (for good reason: you could store malicious ones and jump across security zones by injecting code into other users' applications by replacing some runtime files with new ones that get loaded the next time they use that application).
Python is a strongly-typed language, which I like; Perl is a mess. I like how Python will compile-check and then runtime-check, is easy to test, and will throw an exception and traceback for the tiniest thing that any sane language should sensibly handle. You mean I can't pass a number as a string to be printed, I have to str() it? Idiot language, Perl automatically knows that! ... but then again Perl applications never work and are impossible to debug...
That's far better than what I can get quoted, and I've been offered no subsidy. I'm trying to get a college student to get herself some insurance with an HSA; she takes care of herself and never goes to the doctors ever, so I figured an HDHP like I have (I have a CDHP through my employer) with an HSA option and Wellness coverage would be good. Holy crap the options are expensive and it's a bring-your-own-money plan >:|
Actually, Python is strong-dynamic-duck-typed and pre-compiles. Each time you install a Python module, the package manager runs Python to load it as a privileged user--which automatically generates a .pyc and a .pyo compiled native object in the module directory. There are many further implementations of Python (including the ridiculous Pypy, a Python interpreter written in Python) that are compatible with the language; Google supplies Dalvik, a Google-written implementation of Java, so I fail to see why it's any huge obstacle for them to have supplied a Google-written implementation of Python instead.
Java was used for strategic reasons, not technical reasons.
It would have been better if Android supported Python instead of Java.
Get paid very little to ... go out and put on a political show that has no impact on our lives and safety aside from destroying our economy and creating a lot of panic so that our public servants can seize power and get us to call them "leaders".
It's not forbidden and it's implied by the Constitution's reference to patents and copyright that Congress is expected to support the advances of the arts and sciences. This to me implies that it's expected that individual states will fund technological advancements in their own state.
The plans are too expensive for poor people. This government healthcare stuff has made healthcare much, much more expensive. I mean back in the day I had a $10 deductible with full coverage for everything and I paid $348/mo. Now I'm paying $20/mo for my employer-supplied CDHP that gives me an HSA I can add $3500 per year to pre-tax, meaning I save about 30% on everything from bandages and antihistamines to Target clinic visits and emergency surgery. On top of that, the HSA covers anything beyond a $3,500 per-anum maximum: if I get cancer or break a bone or whatnot, I pay $3,500 and they pay everything (my deductible is $1500, but it goes toward this $3,500 maximum). They do pay 100% of any wellness service I contract--a doctor's visit for a check-up, physical, vaccinations, other preventative care is covered absolutely and I pay $0.
For the privilege of managing your own risk and being immune to sudden ridiculously high health care expenses beyond $5,500 per annum, while paying for absolutely everything yourself, you need to pay... $194/mo on the open market. Seriously. HDHP for an individual is about $200/mo. The cost of a plan with Wellness benefits (the insurance company pays for you to get regular check-ups and vaccinations to avoid the eventuality of paying out when you fall severely ill) and a $3,500 per-annum out-of-pocket maximum is around $300/mo. They charge you $200/mo to have a savings account and $300/mo to get two $75 doctor's office visits and a $15 flu vaccination for free.
The risk should be substantially lower if they supply clinical services. Some modern HMOs are as low as $70/mo and they have actual coverage. How in the fuck are no-coverage HDHPs $200/mo?!
I have actually argued for $800 toilet seats at my place of work. Once I was unable to hold out past 2pm, so I used the company facilities--and HALF a roll of toilet paper. Half the roll. Not only did I clog the toilet, but that evening when I showered it was quite painful due to a nasty rash I'd developed from improper hygiene.
My bathroom comes equipped with a shower, which I use when hygiene is required. You wouldn't fist your hands into a pile of cow manure and then wipe off with a paper towel before you prepare dinner, now would you? Why public facilities aren't equipped with the correct hygiene products is beyond me and, frankly, disturbing as all hell.
Versus Facebook, Slashdot, Digg, Reddit.
A lot tougher to get right than software. In software you can implement anything you want, as badly as you want. It doesn't cost anything and it's easy to start over.
readmefirst.txt
They're not "Trying". Filibuster is a Republican artform; they *will* defund Obamacare with this tactic. They don't even have to rotate people at a podium for this one; they'll just wait for the Democrats to get tired of a government shutdown and concede.
These folks can hold out.
Interestingly, I have a 3800mAh in my Google Galaxy Nexus. With NFC.
Galaxy Nexus was a Samsung based on the Samsung Galaxy, not sure which (I think the G2). Nexus 4 was another LG phone but I don't follow them so can't call out the model.
Wait until NOW and the Feminazi Organization of America get a hold of this study. They can tear it apart explaining how women aren't any more emotional or irrational than men. (It's been scientifically shown that the emotion and reason centers of the brain override each other--using logic numbs emotion, and emotional reactions numb logic)
Perhaps. My point is that thousands of years of geological stress buildup were released two years ago. You're not going to get much of a bang for a while.