> they are a type system feature and have nothing to do with FP I suggested in a sibling reply that the use of type-theoretic notions in FP is a natural out gr

> they are a type system feature and have nothing to do with FP I suggested in a sibling reply that the use of type-theoretic notions in FP is a natural out growth of the initial motives of the FP paradigm. While I wouldn't think that FP languages must incorporate type-theoretic notions, it does seem to me fitting that many would, since type systems have been involved with the functional understanding of computation since quite early on. Do think that line of reasoning make sense?