3 ms·

“Julia is squarely in the dynamic camp” - Stefan Karpinski, Julia co-creator https://stackoverflow.com/a/28096079 https://stackoverflow.com/a/28096079

• codr7 6y ago
  Well, that's like...his perspective. It's a spectrum, not either or. Julia and Common Lisp are somewhere in the middle.
• mirekrusin 6y ago
  ...but you've ommited what I meant "(...) Unlike many dynamic languages, however, Julia has a fairly sophisticated language for talking about types, and you can annotate expressions with types. (...)" Also other answers have some good information, ie: " (...) It can also be useful to indicate the argument types to restrict the kind of parameters passed when calling. Our function header for floating point numbers would then look as function mult(x::Float64, y::Float64). When we call this function with mult(5, 6), we receive an error, ERROR: 'mult' has no method matching mult(::Int64, ::Int64 ), proving that Julia is indeed a strongly typed language. It does not accept integer parameters for the floating point arguments. (...) " ...in other words saying that "Julia is dynamic langauge, full stop." doesn't answer the question fully as for many readers it implies "weak typing", however it's dynamic, but strongly-typed, with state of art optimisations available as in statically typed languages, with proper multiple dispatch on all arguments (not single/this dispatch as in ie. java) etc. It is definatelly worth playing with the language for people who hesiate on learning it - Julia provides some very interesting features not seen anywhere else.