Joachim Durchholz wrote: > > > A type is the encoding of these properties. A type > > varying over time is an inherent contradiction (or another abuse of the > > term "type"). > > No. It's just a matter of definition, essentially. > E.g. in Smalltalk and Lisp, it does make sense to talk of the "type" of > a name or a value, even if that type may change over time.
OK, now we are simply back full circle to Chris Smith's original complaint that started this whole subthread, namely (roughly) that long-established terms like "type" or "typing" should *not* be stretched in ways like this, because that is technically inaccurate and prone to misinterpretation. - Andreas -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
