The python type hints are useful for static analysis (and yes, should be the default) but it’s a joke compared to the utility of types in a language like Haskell.

>Strong static typing has been an option in Python for years now, and it should just be the default.

https://docs.python.org/3/library/typing.html

"The Python runtime does not enforce function and variable type annotations. They can be used by third party tools such as type checkers, IDEs, linters, etc."

Which third-party enforcement mechanism do you propose become the default?

Typing with tools like Pyright doesn't come close to providing what a good statically typechecked language provides.

There are many reasons for this. A big one is that many libraries are only partially typed at best, and dynamic types tend to propagate, weakening the guarantees you get from type checking.

Dynamic idioms in general, including something as common as string-indexed dictionaries, negate type checking. Runtime metaprogramming is the same. All of these things have equivalents in a good statically checked language, but Python doesn't follow those models.

Fundamentally, in Python static typing is an optional analysis layer over a dynamic language, and the consequences of that can't be fully mitigated. The result is a big difference in what types can guarantee.