Matthias Blume schrieb:
> Joachim Durchholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> Matthias Blume schrieb:
>>> Joachim Durchholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>>
>>>> Matthias Blume schrieb:
>>>>> 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.
>>>> This is defining a single term ("statically typed") using three
>>>> undefined terms ("typing judgements", "typing rules", "typing
>>>> environment").
>>> This was not meant to be a rigorous definition.
>> Rigorous or not, introducing additional undefined terms doesn't help
>> with explaining a term.
>
> I think you missed my point. My point was that a language is
> statically typed IF IT IS DEFINED THAT WAY, i.e., if it has a static
> type system that is PART OF THE LANGUAGE DEFINITION. The details are
> up to each individual definition.
Well, that certainly makes more sense to me.
Regards,
Jo
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
