|
Third, there has been a sense that ``dynamic'' or ``scripting'' language users do |
I think as stated, the third reason needs some extra steps to fit naturally into "why dynamic typing" and that it contains two separate things, which is that
- when a type system is expressive/easy-to-use enough, it can actually help human programmers to be explicit about types. it's not just about helping the compiler emit efficient code.
- but still sometimes it's nice to be able to avoid being explicit about types, especially during early stages of code development (?)
I have a hard time thinking about whether 2 is specific to dynamic type systems. Does the auto keyword in C++ count as a way to sort of "not hear about types"?
phdthesis/chap1.tex
Line 309 in def0609
I think as stated, the third reason needs some extra steps to fit naturally into "why dynamic typing" and that it contains two separate things, which is that
I have a hard time thinking about whether 2 is specific to dynamic type systems. Does the
autokeyword in C++ count as a way to sort of "not hear about types"?