Matthias Blume wrote:
> "Rob Thorpe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> I don't think dynamic typing is that nebulous. I remember this being
>> discussed elsewhere some time ago, I'll post the same reply I did then
>> ..
>>
>>
>> A language is statically typed if a variable has a property - called
>> it's type - attached to it, and given it's type it can only represent
>> values defined by a certain class.
>
> By this definition, all languages are statically typed (by making that
> "certain class" the set of all values). Moreover, this "definition",
> when read the way you probably wanted it to be read, requires some
> considerable stretch to accommodate existing static type systems such
> as F_\omega.
>
> Perhaps better: A language is statically typed if its definition
> includes (or ever better: is based on) a static type system, i.e., a
> static semantics with typing judgments derivable by typing rules.
> Usually typing judgmets associate program phrases ("expressions") with
> types given a typing environment.
How does your definition exclude the trivial type system in which the
only typing judgment states that every expression is acceptable?
Pascal
--
3rd European Lisp Workshop
July 3 - Nantes, France - co-located with ECOOP 2006
http://lisp-ecoop06.bknr.net/
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
