> What do you gain by having no fundamental datatypes, only bits? I'd say what you gain is reusability, mostly. When you impose a datatype on data, it comes wi

> What do you gain by having no fundamental datatypes, only bits? I'd say what you gain is reusability, mostly. When you impose a datatype on data, it comes with a series of constraints and expectations, so you can only use the data in the ways prescribed by its type. If the data doesn't have attached a type of is own, you can use it in different ways at different contexts - this can be valuable for data transformation processes, such as compilation or system interfaces. I suppose you could get the same effect by casting the data to a new type when you change it to a new context. I've read a bunch about applying semiotics theory to programming, and changing the meaning of the symbols "on the go" is closer to the way we think (inferring meanings from the signs adequate to the current context) than the old mathematical approach of "every datum has one well-defined type, and only one".