Pascal Costanza wrote: > Chris Smith wrote: > >> While this effort to salvage the term "type error" in dynamic >> languages is interesting, I fear it will fail. Either we'll all have >> to admit that "type" in the dynamic sense is a psychological concept >> with no precise technical definition (as was at least hinted by >> Anton's post earlier, whether intentionally or not) or someone is >> going to have to propose a technical meaning that makes sense, >> independently of what is meant by "type" in a static system. > > What about this: You get a type error when the program attempts to > invoke an operation on values that are not appropriate for this operation. > > Examples: adding numbers to strings; determining the string-length of a > number; applying a function on the wrong number of parameters; applying > a non-function; accessing an array with out-of-bound indexes; etc.
This makes essentially all run-time errors (including assertion failures, etc.) "type errors". It is neither consistent with, nor any improvement on, the existing vaguely defined usage. -- David Hopwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
