From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,c406e0c4a6eb74ed
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news1.google.com!news.glorb.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!feed2.news.rcn.net!rcn!feed3.news.rcn.net!not-for-mail
Sender: jsa@rigel.goldenthreadtech.com
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: ADA Popularity Discussion Request
References: <49dc98cf.0408110556.18ae7df@posting.google.com>
 <cgpma7$pet$1@a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>
 <slrncj0nmf.hl6.adi@ppc201.mipool.uni-jena.de>
 <cgppvn$t4m$1@a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>
 <6F2Yc.848$8d1.621@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>
 <m3isb2ey3w.fsf@rigel.goldenthreadtech.com>
 <hMnYc.1759$w%6.1486@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>
 <m3656vfgmf.fsf@rigel.goldenthreadtech.com>
 <e749549b.0409042036.5d4822a2@posting.googlOrganization: LJK Software
 <vpblkhspuA9F@eisner.encompasserve.org>
 <e749549b.0409051449.574ec9ce@posting.google.com>
 <m3wtz7e4hd.fsf@rigel.goldenthreadtech.com>
 <413e2fbd$0$30586$626a14ce@news.free.fr> <wvbrsm9tjg7e.fsf@sun.com>
 <9snhizowcwg9.16smaxkxhyu67$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <m3isaobub5.fsf@rigel.goldenthreadtech.com>
 <1m4nnmjq31u5p.1ufrf06w53qsz.dlg@40tude.net>
 <wrK%c.102890$dP1.367322@newsc.telia.net>
From: jayessay <nospam@foo.com>
Organization: Tangible
Date: 08 Sep 2004 19:31:14 -0400
Message-ID: <m3wtz49w3h.fsf@rigel.goldenthreadtech.com>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: 
 DXC=@C:KXJ7HAHco?iRBY^D><f0R]m=BkYWIg:6bU3OT9S9j9V[FbZ2>:kc^aM2i8keRmm0F?>=G42]gb
X-Complaints-To: abuse@rcn.com
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:3516
Date: 2004-09-08T19:31:14-04:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Bj�rn Persson <spam-away@nowhere.nil> writes:

> Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
> 
> > From this
> > perspective, dynamically typed systems are subset of statical ones.

No.  You are confusing dynamically typed with _UN_typed.

> > This is
> > important to understand. This is also the reason why "truly dynamic" people
> > sooner or later start to argue against types.

None that I know.  If you look at what "truly dynamic" people are
saying over on c.l.l, c.l.python, c.l.smalltalk, etc. you would know
just how wrong you are.


> > Because, take a static
> > language, derive everything from same base, and you will have the case,
> > where the type information would be as useless (at compile time) as in a
> > dynamically typed language. Static typing does not make type information
> > unavailable. It makes it in some cases a-priory known.
> 
> That's an interesting point. In Java, all classes are derived from
> Object. Yet I find type information useful in Java. But if all
> parameters of all methods were declared as Object, then it would start
> to look like a dynamically typed language.

Egads, no!  It would begin to look _UN_typed!  Please try to get a
grip on this.


/Jon

-- 
'j' - a n t h o n y at romeo/charley/november com