On 11/22/2010 5:42 PM, Michael Torrie wrote: > Ahh, so broken by design. Probably well-intentioned, but still utterly > broken. Even old BASIC would throw an error if you tried to convert or > cast a string to a number that didn't have any numbers in it. > Not "broken" just one of the many cases that duck typing has to handle some way or another, and however it handles it will not work in all cases. You have the same cases in any loosely typed language. Granted, in this particular case we think it should behave differently, but if it did, that would break different cases, or be slower, or whatever tradeoff they weren't willing to make.
Welcome to the world of language design, where everyone's an expert and nobody's opinion matters =cP -Tod Hansmann /* PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug Don't fear the penguin. */
