A new notion: stronglly-typed-by-user language
in [ADA]
|
From: BrianG on 15 Apr 2010 20:22 Martin Krischik wrote: > Am 15.04.2010, 10:59 Uhr, schrieb J-P. Rosen <rosen(a)adalog.fr>: > >> "C++ is a strongly typed language, if conversions between logically >> unrelated types are avoided". > > Driving without seatbelts is perfectly save if accidents are avoided. > > Martin "English is an unambiguous language, if ambiguous statements are avoided." "<The programming language of your choice> creates bug-free software, if bugs are avoided." --BrianG --The cosmic is largely comic
From: Martin Krischik on 16 Apr 2010 02:26 Am 16.04.2010, 02:22 Uhr, schrieb BrianG <briang000(a)gmail.com>: > "<The programming language of your choice> creates bug-free software, > if bugs are avoided." The C / C++ community actually uses this as a serious argument in favour of there language. Martin -- Martin Krischik
From: J-P. Rosen on 16 Apr 2010 03:28 Maciej Sobczak a �crit : > On 15 Kwi, 10:59, "J-P. Rosen" <ro...(a)adalog.fr> wrote: > >> "C++ is a strongly typed language, if conversions between logically >> unrelated types are avoided". >> >> Ain't that cute? > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strong_typing > > "these terms have been given such a wide variety of meanings over the > short history of computing that it is often difficult to know, out of > context, what an individual author means when using them." Of course, there is obviously no clear-cut [...] > The statement that you cited is therefore not very convincing. > > In particular, what are "conversions between logically unrelated > types"? > Is Integer'Image such a conversion? What about arbitrary casts between > numeric types? What about unchecked casts? I was expecting someone to come up with Unchecked_Conversion, so you win :-) Do not confuse "weakly type" and "strongly type with a mean to disable it in a controlled way when absolutely necessary". Having no safety belts in a car is not the same thing as having belts and not putting them (as far as the car design is concerned). What I find amusing (or characteristic of the C/C++ spirit) is the idea that "if you are careful, it is good enough". I generally conclude my presentations of Ada with two quotes. The first one is from K&R, in one of the first books about C: "C has been designed under the hypothesis that the programmes is reasonable and knows what he's doing" The other one from ARM's introduction: "Concern for the human programmer was also stressed during the design" C is not for humans... -- --------------------------------------------------------- J-P. Rosen (rosen(a)adalog.fr) Visit Adalog's web site at http://www.adalog.fr
From: Dmitry A. Kazakov on 16 Apr 2010 03:29 On Thu, 15 Apr 2010 14:31:48 -0700 (PDT), Maciej Sobczak wrote: > In particular, what are "conversions between logically unrelated > types"? > Is Integer'Image such a conversion? Yes, if you include String into the algebra of the Integer type, no otherwise. No different to: function ">" (Left, Right : Integer) return Boolean; What does Boolean here? Is it a type logically unrelated to Integer? -- Regards, Dmitry A. Kazakov http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de
From: Dmitry A. Kazakov on 16 Apr 2010 03:48
On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 09:28:06 +0200, J-P. Rosen wrote: > Do not confuse "weakly type" and "strongly type with a mean to disable > it in a controlled way when absolutely necessary". Having no safety > belts in a car is not the same thing as having belts and not putting > them (as far as the car design is concerned). I like this analogy. C++ has safety belts coiled under the spare tyre in the luggage boot. -- Regards, Dmitry A. Kazakov http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de |