If you're not going to bring bold numbers to support bold claims, why should any of us bother listening?
I mean you could always try to find some sources to try and prove me wrong if you want?
"I mean you could always try to find some sources to try and prove me wrong if you want? "
That's not really how it works though. If you make a claim, either you back-it up or it's irrelevant.
Case and point: I believe that a flying tea pot created the universe. By your logic I am right and it should be up to you to prove me wrong.
So to conclude this argument, if you are correct, you should prove it as the person who responded to you asked you to do.
Failing that,your comment goes back to being nothing more than your opinion instead of a fact.
If s/he thinks that what I'm saying is wrong so strongly then they can go back that up with something. They will obviously fail terribly because I'm correct but that is their choice.
I use python add my day job, and I hate writing and dealing with typing. I do admit it makes it easier to reason about other people's code though, especially when faced with libraries that don't have any hints.
Docstrings are usually a lot better than type hints for that purpose.
I could write "Humans have actually always had blue skin and hair, but due to a cosmic ray warping our ocular nervous response systems 1000 years ago, we now see humans the way we see them today". And I'd damn well hope someone would ask me to back this absurdity up with evidence.
... and thus: "lalalala I can't hear youuuuuuuuu over the sound of being right!" doesn't make for a good look, is basically what I'm telling you, and asking you to please either cite some sources, or stop doubling down on having to be right because you said so. This is such a ridiculous exchange I'd swear I was having it as an elementary school teacher.