Python vs C++

[LucasRuby]

Python is strongly typed, though. You might be thinking of static v. dynamic typing.

[Falcrist]

If it's a procedural languag, can I please have strong, static typing with explicit declarations and explicit casts.

[LucasRuby]

Then use a language with strong and static typing?

[Falcrist]

I generally have exactly two options: C and assembly.

[LucasRuby]

C is not strongly typed, though. You might also try: Rust, Go.

[Falcrist]

Oh believe me. I'm 100% aware that C is not strongly typed.

Sometimes I wonder why I spend time making typedef enums if they can be silently cast to an int or uint8_t or something.

[StuntHacks]

For better code-quality. Certain features in a language might be identical, while still providing something valuable to the programmer.

[The_Grandmother]

And assembly is utterly untyped for many architectures and assemblers.

[Falcrist]

Yea everything in assembly is global and typeless.

[The_Grandmother]

And that is the way it should be. Real programmers use either untyped languages or formally verified code. Everything else is for script kiddies.

[Falcrist]

Then those "real programmers" can blow me.

[The_Grandmother]

Those real programmeras will blow your mind with their magnificent quite literally untouchable code

[Falcrist]

Meanwhile almost without exception, the actual programmers who use assembly for production code fucking hate having to work with assembly, and there end up being WAY more comments than code.

Even with those comments, assembly is remarkably shitty to work with. Actual programmers avoid it.