Hi Zeev, Le 30 mars 2015 16:17, "Zeev Suraski" <z...@zend.com> a écrit : > > All, > > > > One thing that I think we should change is how we refer to the ‘weak’ type > hints. The word ‘weak’ has a negative ring to it, and considering this is > how the language behaves across the board it’s a pretty bad name for this > feature. > > > > Personally I think we should go for ‘dynamic’ when we document it, as this > is the common way to refer to this behavior (dynamic languages). We could > also consider going for ‘lax’ or ‘lenient’ as the opposite of ‘strict’, > although I think we can easily do without introducing a new word into the > vocabulary here.
Dynamic is used in the context of static/dynamic typing though, and that's a different meaning. Strong/weak typing is a known definition, and the correct one here. > > > > Thoughts? > > > > Zeev
