Marshall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Well, it strikes me that some of what the dynamic camp likes > is the actual *absence* of declared types, or the necessity > of having them. At the very least, requiring types vs. not requiring > types is mutually exclusive.
So you're saying, then, that while static typing and dynamic typing are not themselves mutually exclusive, there are people whose concerns run as much in the "not statically typed" direction as in the "dynamically typed" direction? I agree that this is undoubtedly true. That (not statically typed) seems to be what gets all the attention, as a matter of fact. Most programmers in modern languages assume, though, that there will be some kind of safeguard against writing bad code with unpredictable consequences, so in practice "not statically typed" correlates strongly with "dynamically typed". Nevertheless, the existence of languages that are clearly "both" suggests that they should be considered separately to at least some extent. -- Chris Smith - Lead Software Developer / Technical Trainer MindIQ Corporation -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
