[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
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