I believe that the distinction that Stepanov is alluding to is the distinction between intensional and extensional types.[1] > Of course, that's exactly what A

I believe that the distinction that Stepanov is alluding to is the distinction between intensional and extensional types.[1] > Of course, that's exactly what Alan Kay says I'm not sure what Alan Kay says. Your post could be improved by providing a reference or quote so that I can read Alan Kay's take. Note that to varying degrees both C++ and Haskell allow for intensionality without resorting to dynamic types. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extensional_and_intensional_definitions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extensional_and_intensional_de... Edit: clarity.