[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Typing and semantics [dynamic vs. static typing]
> No, wait a minute. I'm not excluding semantics that use type
> information, just those that use the result of the type proof.
But it's not fair to Haskell to not allow it to use the results of type
inference later on, when an explicitly typed language *is* allowed to
use the programmer supplied type annotations (i.e., the results of
manual type inference).
Is the real beef with type inference? Certainly, type inference is
hard to understand if the programmer cannot be made to understand the
type inference algorithm. Haskell programmers seem to learn to cope.
They are using a lazy functional language, after all. Nothing else
makes sense anyway!