[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: in defense of types
Quoting Matthias Felleisen <matthias@ccs.neu.edu>:
>
> In a recent posting, which I promptly lost, Paul Graham, challenged
> the
> usefulness of static typing in programming languages. I'd like to take
> him up on this aspect of PLs.
>
> [Note: For those of you who know me from academic venues,
> you will note that I "play Paul" there, but for very different
> reasons. We need to challenge each other on such statements
> because only strong challenges to scientific claims will ensure
> that these claims are 'hardened'. So, if you want to know what's
> wrong
> with types and the influence of the type research community, go to
> academic
> conferences.]
>
> So here we go. Static types are necessary
> (1) to establish basic properties of software
> and
> (2) to establish absolute yet cheap abstraction boundaries between
> modules.
> LL languages suffer from the lack of types, for this very purpose.
>
> ...
>
> -- Matthias
Static types can also lead to better program understanding:
http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs.cmu.edu/user/roc/public/ICSE97-Final.ps
and optimization:
ftp://ftp.diku.dk/diku/users/henglein/tagging-optimization.dvi.gz
http://www.cs.colorado.edu/~diwan/toplas.ps
Jeff
---
Jeffrey Palm --> http://www.cs.colorado.edu/~jdp