On Wed, Feb 29, 2012 at 4:49 PM, Zeev Suraski <z...@zend.com> wrote: > Kris, > > If we've agreed that strict typing is bad, why is it even showing on the > discussion here? Calling it 'firm' or 'strong' doesn't make a difference. > If it errors out or throws an exception (which BTW is out of the question > for a language feature), it's strict typing, regardless of naming. >
Can someone point to what they perceive to be an appropriate definition of strict typing is (online or in a CS book?) It's one thing to say strict typing is bad, but I'm not confident that everyone is talking about the same thing. My books on programming language design don't specifically speak to "strict" typing (e.g., Language Implementation Patterns, Programming Language Pragmatics, etc.) I've found some Actionscript-specific writings and a few discussions involving Ruby (although my books on Ruby don't speak of "strict" typing), and discussions on variable levels of type checking: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_system#Variable_levels_of_type_checking What is the operationalized definition that the core developers want utilized? Thank you very much, Adam -- Nephtali: A simple, flexible, fast, and security-focused PHP framework http://nephtaliproject.com
