Xref: utzoo comp.lang.misc:7239 comp.object:3007 Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!newstop!exodus!red-dwarf!pallas From: pallas@eng.sun.com (Joseph Pallas) Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc,comp.object Subject: Re: blip [Re: Dynamic typing -- To Have and Have Not ...] Message-ID: Date: 2 Apr 91 17:33:41 GMT References: <3523:Mar1803:21:0591@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> <22032@yunexus.YorkU.CA> <14160@life.ai.mit.edu> <1991Mar25.201620.5839@cua.cary.ibm.com> <879@puck.mrcu> Sender: news@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM Followup-To: comp.lang.misc Lines: 20 In px@fct.unl.pt (Joaquim Baptista [pxQuim]) writes: >Having no types ... Nope, try again. How about, "Having no declared types ..." >just means that this sort of error does not happen, Nope, try again. How about, "just means that this sort of error is not detected at compile time, but at run time," >while the other kinds of error probably remain at the same level. People who think that dynamically typed languages result in typeless programs need to reflect on what they are doing when they write their programs. If your program operates on some object, you can be certain that there is a type implied by that operation. joe