Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!lavaca.uh.edu!menudo.uh.edu!sugar!ficc!peter From: peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) Subject: Re: Dynamic typing (part 3) Message-ID: Reply-To: peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) Organization: Xenix Support, FICC References: <602@optima.cs.arizona.edu> <2400035@otter.hpl.hp.com> Date: Wed, 20 Mar 91 15:44:27 GMT In article <2400035@otter.hpl.hp.com> sfk@otter.hpl.hp.com (Steve Knight) writes: > Of course, being choked to death by irate C programmers is only one of the > many hazards of using a dynamically typed language ... Looks to me like this is more a factor of the richness of the runtime library, rather than the fact that it's dynamically typed. Of course, dynamically typed languages often have a rich subroutine library, but that's not always true. Consider Lisp 1.5, or CScheme. -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' peter@ferranti.com +1 713 274 5180. 'U` "Have you hugged your wolf today?"