Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!lavaca.uh.edu!menudo.uh.edu!lobster!sugar!ficc!peter
From: peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: Dynamic typing (part 3)
Message-ID: <539AQS3@xds13.ferranti.com>
Reply-To: peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva)
Organization: Xenix Support, FICC
References: <731@optima.cs.arizona.edu> <1991Mar20.185308.8275@maths.nott.ac.uk> <22MAR91.09242511@uc780.umd.edu> <3E6A.I9@xds13.ferranti.com> <22MAR91.22190193@uc780.umd.edu>
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 91 22:39:53 GMT

In article <22MAR91.22190193@uc780.umd.edu> cs450a03@uc780.umd.edu writes:
> >If you need the semantics of eval, you need an interpreted (or incrementally
> >compiled) language. As a counterexample, Forth provides for this tool
> >but is not a dynamically typed language in any sense of the word.

> True, but I'm not sure it's very statically typed either.

It's weakly statically typed. Basically, it has two types, the character
and the cell. You can build more complex types with <builds-does> or
whatever the latest fashionable term for that is, but it remains statically
typed. Of course you can build a dynamically typed language on top of it
with appropriate definitions... but the basic language is weakly and
statically typed.
-- 
Peter da Silva.  `-_-'  peter@ferranti.com
+1 713 274 5180.  'U`  "Have you hugged your wolf today?"