Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!att!linac!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sdd.hp.com!news.cs.indiana.edu!arizona.edu!arizona!gudeman
From: gudeman@cs.arizona.edu (David Gudeman)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc
Subject: Re: Dynamic typing (part 3)
Message-ID: <613@optima.cs.arizona.edu>
Date: 13 Mar 91 00:54:20 GMT
Sender: news@cs.arizona.edu
Lines: 16

In article  <YR+9VUB@xds13.ferranti.com> Peter da Silva writes:
]In article <602@optima.cs.arizona.edu> gudeman@cs.arizona.edu (David Gudeman) writes:
]> Now people have actually come to believe, against all
]> evidence, that static typing is important for program reliability.
]
]No, they believe that dynamic typing imposes a certain unavoidable runtime
]overhead, and aren't willing to pay that cost.

You haven't been following the thread.  Only one person of all that
replied has mentioned the overhead.  Everyone else is worried that
types errors aren't detected by the compiler.  BTW, I mentioned the
high overhead in my first posting on the subject.
--
					David Gudeman
gudeman@cs.arizona.edu
noao!arizona!gudeman