[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
At 12:07 PM 5/5/2002 -0600, Uche Ogbuji wrote:
>Anyway, back to the main point. I agree with your broader definition of
>types as being defined by constraints, and this is *precisely* why I am
>always ridiculing the W3C efforts which put so much effort into static
>typing at the behest of their SQL and procedural programming backgrounds
>(I guess). Programmers don't need to become pure mathematicians to
>appreciate this: Bertrand Meyer provides much of the essence in his own
>writing about object-oriented development.
I don't really understand you here, Uche.
Bertrand Meyer certainly felt that static typing was a central feature of
Eiffel, the language he designed. Functional languages like Haskell and
OCamL and XML systems like XForm, RELAX, and XML Schema had much more of an
influence on the XQuery formal semantics than anything in SQL.
And the tie-in to procedural languages eludes me.
If you think Bertrand Meyer is on the right track, saying that both dynamic
typing and static typing are important, then why do you think that this
does not apply to XQuery?
Jonathan
|
