You should look at Common Lisp. it's definition of "optional typing" is that if you take a correct program and remove all the type declarations, then it still works correctly, although it may be significantly less efficient. Larry and i have discussed this and that was his goai in Perl. Now Perl doesn't quite meet that because of inferred method dispatch on .new(). you need to change
my Dog $spot = .new(); to my $Spot = Dog.new(); when you remove the declaration. -- Mark Biggar [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] -------------- Original message ---------------------- From: TSa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > HaloO, > > Mark J. Reed wrote: > > It would behoove @Larry to examine the optional type constraints > > system proposed for Javascript:TNG (see link from firefox.com > > developers page). I therefore assume that they have done so, but > > others would benefit by doing likewise. :) > > Do I get that right: you imply that I didn't do my homework? > Note that I don't feel offended by that. > > I found two dissertations and a couple of papers about typing > JavaScript. The quintessential is that optional typing is > defined as having *no* impact on the dynamic behavior of the > program. In that respect type annotations are like comments. > I doubt that this is the case with Perl 6, or is it? > > > Regards, TSa. > -- > > The Angel of Geometry and the Devil of Algebra fight for the soul > of any mathematical being. -- Attributed to Hermann Weyl
