Lists Home |
Date Index |
Static Typing - Type of variables must be declared at compile time (e.g.
Dynamic Typing - Type of variables determined from usage at runtime
Strong Typing - Variables cannot be coerced to unrelated types. (e.g.
Weak Typing - Variables can be coerced to unrelated types. (e.g. C)
These are the definitions I've seen in writings from academia over the
past few years.
From: Sean McGrath [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2003 12:37 PM
To: Dare Obasanjo; email@example.com
Subject: RE: [xml-dev] Strong versus (weak|runtime) typing
I'm intrigued. How would you define "weak typing"?
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.
>From: Sean McGrath [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
>Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2003 11:20 AM
>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.
>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