Re: strong/weak typing terminology (was Re: [Caml-list] Scripting in ocaml)

["Daniel Bünzli" <daniel.buenzli@epfl.ch>]

Le 22 déc. 06 à 17:51, Tom a écrit :

> But this chart is not expressive enough...

Its aim is not to describe anything you can say about programming  
languages. It describes the particular notion that Chad was implying  
by "strong" typing.

> I believe that the properties implied by "weak/strong" refer to the  
> ability (or the disability) of the compiler/runtime (or rather  
> semantics of the language) to change types at will (actually,  
> whenever this seems useful, in cases such as "string" + 7 or "9" -  
> "3").

That's _one_ of the bullet points listed in [1] as a _possible_  
meaning for weak/strong typing. Note that your reaction makes my  
point : do not use the notion of weak/strong typing it always mean  
something different to other persons and hence it doesn't mean anything.

A language that has the property you describe can simply be said to  
have implicit type conversions.

Best,

Daniel

[1] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strong_typing>