[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Dare,
I'm intrigued. How would you define "weak typing"?
Sean
At 12:05 12/02/2003 -0800, Dare Obasanjo wrote:
>I'm impressed by the fact that neither the interviewer nor the
>interviewer seem to be able to tell the difference between strong vs.
>weak typing and static vs. dynamic typing. It is especially amusing to
>see someone claim that Smalltalk is "weakly typed".
>
>As for what this argument has to do with the XML arguments on strong vs.
>weak typing I'd assumed it was obvious. The people who process XML with
>strongly typed languages (e.g. Java & C# folks) are all about strongly
>typed XML while those who process it with weakly typed languages (Perl &
>Python folks) are for weak typing in XML. Or at least that has been the
>case in the XML-DEV discussions I've seen.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Sean McGrath [mailto:sean.mcgrath@propylon.com]
>Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2003 11:20 AM
>To: xml-dev@lists.xml.org
>Subject: [xml-dev] Strong versus (weak|runtime) typing
>
>
>An interesting interview with the great man himself, Guido van Rossum,
>creator of Python. http://www.artima.com/intv/strongweak.html
>
>Is the strong/weak/runtime typing argument over XML any different from
>that debate in programming languages.
>
>I dunno.
>
>Sean
>
>
>http://seanmcgrath.blogspot.com
>
>
>
>-----------------------------------------------------------------
>The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
>initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>
>
>The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
>
>To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
>manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>
http://seanmcgrath.blogspot.com
|
