Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cmcl2!kramden.acf.nyu.edu!brnstnd
From: brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc
Subject: Re: Dynamic typing (part 3)
Message-ID: <25381:Mar1221:07:3891@kramden.acf.nyu.edu>
Date: 12 Mar 91 21:07:38 GMT
References: <609@optima.cs.arizona.edu>
Organization: IR
Lines: 17

In article <609@optima.cs.arizona.edu> gudeman@cs.arizona.edu (David Gudeman) writes:
> Why should a programming language be expected to catch this type of
> error at compile time, and not some other class of errors?  Why are
> type errors so special?

Compiler writers generally find it convenient to catch type errors.
Programmers generally find it convenient to know the type of a variable
and to have types always checked at compile time (rather than as an
optimization that a few compilers might provide). Who are you to argue
with taste?

> Required declarations are not in languages because they
> are a good idea,

I have to disagree. Declarations help catch typos, if nothing else.

---Dan