On Oct 14, 2004, at 4:15, Blake wrote:

> On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 00:09:06 -0700, Andreas Raab <andreas.raab at gmx.de> 
>  wrote:
>
> > Hi Blake,
>
> Thanks for responding Andreas!
>
> > Weak vs. strong typing is not primarily about type-*checking* but 
> rather 
> > about whether an object (reference) uniquely belongs to a type or 
> not.
>
> Well, okay, but what's the purpose of having an object reference 
> uniquely 
> belong to a type if that never comes into play? OK, so foo uniquely 
> belongs to class bar, but bar is never referenced, since foo responds 
> to 
> bie, bix and fee? I mean, at that point, what does "strongly tpyed" 
> even 
> mean.

It means that the type of the object is so tightly bound to it, that it 
continues to play a crucial role long after the compilation phase of 
the program life cycle. Everything you do with this object is an 
implicit type check. Where as a "C" like program expresses some desire 
to keep the compiler happy, but past that point, the type becomes 
irrelevant, thus weak.

--
Travis Griggs
Objologist
My Other Machine runs OSX. But then... so does this one.


-----------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: This email is bound by the terms and conditions described at
http://www.key.net/disclaimer.htm