On Sat, 25 Aug 2007 18:22:13 -0700, (Randal L. Schwartz) wrote: >>>>>> ""Jeff" == "Jeff Pang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > "Jeff> Perl isn't a strong type language like C,so you don't have the need to > "Jeff> convert the variable type distinctly. > > Perl is a very strongly typed language. The problem is that people keep > thinking "number" or "string" is a type in Perl. It isn't. The type is > called "scalar". Other types are "array" and "hash" and "filehandle" and > "dirhandle" and "built-in object" and "user-defined object". > > Please stop with the "perl is loosely typed" nonsense.
The term "strong typing" is so ill-defined as to make this an angels-dancing-on-a-pinhead discussion and unlikely to lead to any enlightenment. Even the Wikipedia definition says that there *is* no accepted definition and some of the common usages contradict each other. Under the interpretations I subscribe to I couldn't think of a language that would qualify as weakly typed if Perl were strongly typed, so I believe that you're apply some other interpretation. In keeping with the multiple interpretations, there doesn't appear to be any consensus about Perl's strength of typing. http://use.perl.org/~Ovid/journal/22311 sums it up well for me. -- Peter Scott http://www.perlmedic.com/ http://www.perldebugged.com/ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://learn.perl.org/
