Chris Smith schreef: > Static types are not fuzzy
Static types can be fuzzy as well. For example: a language can define that extra accuracy and bits may be used for the implementation of calculations: d = a * b / c Often some minimum is guaranteed. > I see it as quite reasonable when there's an effort by several > participants in this thread to either imply or say outright that > static type systems and dynamic type systems are variations of > something generally called a "type system", and given that static > type systems are quite formally defined, that we'd want to see a > formal definition for a dynamic type system before accepting the > proposition that they are of a kind with each other. The 'dynamic type' is just another type. -- Affijn, Ruud "Gewoon is een tijger." -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
