[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: the forward method [dynamic vs. static typing]

On Dec 9, 2003, at 19:27, Avi Bryant wrote:

> For example, wouldn't this mean that simply loading an implementation 
> of "not" that operated on, say, numbers, would change the semantics of 
> this program?  I'm not used to having far reaching changes come from 
> increasing the domain of a function, but maybe it's not a big deal in 
> practice.

Changing code changes program behavior. I don't see how that makes the 
problem any worse.

What makes me uneasy are completely dynamic systems like Lisp and 
Smalltalk, where you can actually replace a function while the program 
is running. Then again, that's a mighty powerful feature and very 
useful for servers and development environments.

I prefer the Dylan approach, where change at runtime can be limited to 
differing degrees in different regions of code, depending upon the 
requirements. And the development environment is explicitly separated 
from the target program, but the power of complete dynamism can be made 
available when tethered to the development environment.

Chris Page - Software Wrangler - palmOne, Inc.

   Dylan + You = Code