Re: [stack] Parameters: ordered versus named

On Sep 9, 2007, at 19:23 , Christopher Diggins wrote:

>>> This is an example of a runtime checked language, also called a
>>> dynamically typed language, though some theorists object to the term
>>> dynamic typing. Personally I have no qualms with it.
>>>
>>> -D
>>
>> OK, that's what I thought it was. It seems dynamic typing means two
>> things: (1) run-time type checking; and (2) data is typed --
>> variables are
>> not. Clearly (1) allows (2) but (2) is not required.
>> Is this part of
>> the source
>> of disagreement over the name?
>
> I shouldn't speculate too much. I think the disagreement is
> artificial. There were some threads on
> http://www.Lambda-the-Ultimate.org related to the issue, but in
> searching for them, I see many people happily talking about dyanmic
> typing, without complaining about the term.
>
> Dynamic typing invariably means: runtime checking of tags associated
> with values. All values that are runtime checked would have to have
> tags identifying their type. Of course, you can mix static typing with
> dynamic typing if you want.
>
> I'm sorry if I have confused the issues for you.
>
> - Christopher

No, my confusion is entirely my own and things are becoming clearer.
--
Don