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