On Oct 17, 2004, at 1:16 AM, Andres Valloud wrote:

> sd> Now I like the idea of gilad bracha on pluggable type system: The
> sd> idea in a nutshell is to have OPTIONAL type systems (ownership,
> sd> ...) that you can use to browse the code but that are NOT used at
> sd> all for checking or defining the language semantics. Following
> sd> animorphicSmalltalk. We are waiting to get a good guy to try this
> sd> idea on Smalltalk.
>
> My 2 cents: since we'd do that to get performance, and 90% of the time
> is spent on less than 10% of the code, we should only see the optional
> type tags in less than 10% of the code - otherwise it has no value.

Why for performance?  One of the cool things about animorphic was that 
the type annotations were completely ignored by the JIT, even though 
they were available.  The runtime info, I assume, was better.

Avi