Re: [stack] Cat Type Inference
John Cowan <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.lang.concatenative |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
William Tanksley, Jr scripsit: > By the way, the ONLY thing type inference replaces is having the > programmer write out the type signatures of functions. It doesn't > replace data types, and doesn't make it possible to write type-unsafe > code; in fact, generally it makes it harder, since you have to write > code that that computer can prove is safe. Most type-inferencing languages allow a modicum of explicit typing in the situation where the compiler cannot decide: for example, you cannot write "double x = x + x" in Standard ML, because the compiler cannot decide if x is floating-point or integer, so you must use an explicit type. > > It seems intuitive that strong-typing, whether by pre-declaration or inference, > > would allow better refactoring by an IDE. Smart IDE's are really what > > I'd like to know more about. > > Agreed. In fact, the whole concept and technology of refactoring arose in the Smalltalk community, using a language that has always been dynamically typed. -- John Cowan http://ccil.org/~cowan [email protected] Lope de Vega: "It wonders me I can speak at all. Some caitiff rogue did rudely yerk me on the knob, wherefrom my wits still wander." An Englishman: "Ay, a filchman to the nab betimes 'll leave a man crank for a spell." --Harry Turtledove, Ruled Britannia