4 ms·

I think we're starting to talk past each other and this is falling into the well-rehashed pit of "are runtime types really 'types' or just semantically normal r

I think we're starting to talk past each other and this is falling into the well-rehashed pit of "are runtime types really 'types' or just semantically normal runtime assertions." I'm implicitly talking through the lens of the latter and you're talking through the former. Regardless I agree with your central point that Julia is doing cool things with runtime types and its design is what is giving it the ability to do such impressive runtime optimizations.

eigenspace 6y ago
> I think we're starting to talk past each other and this is falling into the well-rehashed pit of "are runtime types really 'types' or just semantically normal runtime assertions." Sorry, that wasn't the direction I was trying to go. I just meant to say that the work it'd take to make different type system in a dynamic language is approximately the amount of work it'd take to make a whole new language. So I think from a practical POV, it's fair to think of the type system that comes with a given dynamic language as being more or less intrinsic to it, regardless of what one's philosophical stance is on types in dynamic languages generally.