Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!uupsi!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: <626@optima.cs.arizona.edu> <1991Mar13.163629.12630@engage.enet.dec.com> <962@mgt3.sci.UUCP> Date: Tue, 2 Apr 91 22:55:42 GMT In article <962@mgt3.sci.UUCP> dc@mgt3.sci.com (D. C. Sessions) writes: > The upshot of this little affair was the conversion of an entire shop > full of C hackers into Modula-2 fanatics, purely because they *never* > wanted to give up intermodule type-safety again. My response is "convert to ANSI C, which gives you intermodule type safety". > So: for the purposes of the current discussion, how do our ideal > dynamically-typed languages ensure that a similar little > misunderstanding doesn't happen again? That's easy: the function that gets a foo wouldn't misinterpret it as being a bar in the first place. It'd either have kicked out an error, or the test for bar.magic would have failed. -- Peter da Silva. `-_-' peter@ferranti.com +1 713 274 5180. 'U` "Have you hugged your wolf today?"