David Squire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Matthias Blume wrote: >> David Squire <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> >>> Andreas Rossberg wrote: >>>> Rob Thorpe wrote: >>>>>>> No, that isn't what I said. What I said was: >>>>>>> "A language is latently typed if a value 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." >>>>>> "it [= a value] [...] can [...] represent values"? >>>>> ??? >>>> I just quoted, in condensed form, what you said above: namely, that >>>> a value represents values - which I find a strange and circular >>>> definition. >>>> >>> But you left out the most significant part: "given it's type it can >>> only represent values *defined by a certain class*" (my emphasis). In >>> C-ish notation: >>> >>> unsigned int x; >>> >>> means that x can only represent elements that are integers elements of >>> the set (class) of values [0, MAX_INT]. Negative numbers and >>> non-integer numbers are excluded, as are all sorts of other things. >> This x is not a value. It is a name of a memory location. >> >>> You over-condensed. >> Andreas condensed correctly. > > I should have stayed out of this. I had not realised that it had > degenerated to point-scoring off someone typing "value" when it is > clear from context that he meant "variable".
If he really had meant "variable" then he would have been completely wrong. > Bye. Bye. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
