Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

From Wikipedia:

- Static Typing: "A programming language is said to use static typing when type checking is performed during compile-time as opposed to run-time." [1]

- Dynamic Typing: "A programming language is said to be dynamically typed when the majority of its type checking is performed at run-time as opposed to at compile-time." [2]

- Strong Typing: "A type system is said to feature strong typing when it specifies one or more restrictions on how operations involving values of different data types can be intermixed. The opposite of strong typing is weak typing." [3]

- Weak Typing: "One claimed advantage of weak typing over strong typing is that it requires less effort on the part of the programmer because the compiler or interpreter implicitly performs certain kinds of conversions. However, one claimed disadvantage is that weakly typed programming systems catch fewer errors at compile time and some of these might still remain after testing has been completed." [4]

Links:

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_system#Static_typing

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_system#Dynamic_typing

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strong_typing

[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weak_typing



Not sure why everyone's being so cryptic, so it's probably me that's the confused one. Let me try to guess:

"There is a wikiality driven split in the English language.

Camp A says that a strongly typed language prohibits immoral implicit conversions, such as "1" + 1 => 2 or even more grotesquely, "1000" == "1e3" => true.

Camp B says that a strongly typed language gives each value a type, and that all operations which do not have well-defined semantics will signal an error rather than allow operations to execute which assume incorrect typing.

Camp A currently owns the articles "weak typing" and most of the article "strong typing". Camp B is settling for teaching the controversy in "Strong vs Weak typing" and putting passive-aggressive little notes on all the articles that Camp A's view is mistaken. "

Did I get it right? If so, camp B is correct and camp A are being dicks about terminology that they're getting wrong.


Everything before 'Did I get it right?' is correct.

I have no opinion on the bit after that. :-)


We know what the definitions are; the confusion is that I don't see where exactly in the article he is confounding them. I'll read it again...




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: