Re: [Axiom-developer] B#

[Gabriel Dos Reis]

"Bill Page" <address@hidden> writes:

| On November 20, 2005 10:16 PM Tim Daly (root) wrote:
| 
| > 
| > Two comments. Lisp IS strongly typed. It just associates the type
| > with the object and not with the box (variable) it comes in. That
| > is, it distinguishes a TV from the box labelled TV as the type is
| > related to the object and not the box. Other "strongly-typed"
| > languages don't so once you say a box (variable) is a TV box you
| > can't put anything else in it.  You can spot a Box-Typed language
| > because it forces you to coerce your entertainment center to a TV
| > to put it into a TV box. Exactly why you would want to consider
| > the TV and the box it came in to have any fixed relationship is
| > beyond most lispers.
| 
| I think this is a great analogy! :-) In technical jargon we
| would translate "box-typed language" to statically typed.

It it a good analogy; but it is just that: An analogy.
Many statically typed languages do make the distinction between the
box and what-is-in-the-box: They call the former a "Variable" and the
later an "object", so they don't confuse the TV box with the TV.

Furthremore, if one translates "box-typed language" to statically
typed language, then I think one makes a fundamental mistake of
confusing "strong typing" with "static typing".

-- Gaby