Xref: utzoo comp.lang.misc:3896 comp.software-eng:2759
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!att!cbnewsc!lgm
From: lgm@cbnewsc.ATT.COM (lawrence.g.mayka)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc,comp.software-eng
Subject: Re: An Interesting View of "Strong" Vs. "Weak" Typing
Keywords: typing, Ada, Lisp, definitions, evidence
Message-ID: <12843@cbnewsc.ATT.COM>
Date: 15 Jan 90 14:24:27 GMT
References: <1990Jan13.155115.4809@mentor.com>
Reply-To: lgm@cbnewsc.ATT.COM (lawrence.g.mayka,ihp,)
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 23

In article <1990Jan13.155115.4809@mentor.com> franka@mntgfx.UUCP (Frank A. Adrian) writes:
>of development seems to be a bit of overkill.  We may ask a somewhat
>cynical question as to if the difficulty of setting up and changing type
>hierarchies in the strongly-typed languages leads to programs which:
>
>	a) are "correct" with respect to the initial specification, but 
>	b) have not explored the possible type configuration space suf-
>		ficiently to have a maintainable type structure, so
>	c) significant changes to these strongly-typed structural behemoths
>		are next to impossible.

For this reason I submit that run-time typing is particularly
appropriate for large software systems that must evolve
continuously over a long lifecycle in response to unforeseen
customer needs - e.g., feature-rich telecommunications switching
systems.


	Lawrence G. Mayka
	AT&T Bell Laboratories
	lgm@ihlpf.att.com

Standard disclaimer.