12 ms·
Well strong vs weak typing is both orthoganal to and predates most of the discussion of static vs dynamic typing. You have to deal with conversions no matter wh
by duaneb 11y ago
Well strong vs weak typing is both orthoganal to and predates most of the discussion of static vs dynamic typing. You have to deal with conversions no matter what.
- masklinn 11y ago> Well strong vs weak typing is orthoganal to the discussion of static vs dynamic typing. "strong vs weak" can't be orthogonal to anything because it's meaningless and nonsensical. That's like saying NaN is lower than 5. > Well strong vs weak typing is predates most of the discussion of static vs dynamic typing. [citation required]
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- duaneb 11y agoI'm not sure what there is to be confused about. "weak" types mean they may elide into other types implicitly. "strong" types mean that the value will always be interpreted as one (set of) type(s). (really just one type, but that type may be a subtype, so it gets confusing.)