4 ms·
The author explained why. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_inference http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_inference
by jallmann 15y ago
The author explained why.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_inference http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_inference
- rat 15y agoWouldn't that be Typed Scheme/Typed Racket?
- eru 15y agoWithout the macro-friendly syntax.
- stonemetal 15y agoNot to put words in other people's mouth but I believe he is more concerned with 'version of Lisp' than the 'statically-typed' part. It is kind of like saying basic is an interpreted version of C. The two languages are more or less unrelated outside of the fact that both are impure functional programming languages.
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- radarsat1 15y agoI'm familiar with type inference, thanks. I have no idea what it has to do with Lisp.
- jallmann 15y agoI just interpreted the article an imprecise way of saying " they're both functional, but one is statically typed," by assuming Lisp as the canonical example of FP (rightly or not). Not the most apt comparison, to be sure.