Re: Proposal: 6NF

On Oct 12, 1:26 pm, Gene Wirchenko <g..._at_ocis.net> wrote:
> "David Cressey" <dcres..._at_verizon.net> wrote:
> >"Gene Wirchenko" <g..._at_ocis.net> wrote in message
>
> >> C is quite strongly typed. It also allows you to override
> >> typing, but the results are often undefined or implementation-defined.
>
> >That's weak typing IIUC. I do not think you do.
>

We're back to definitional arguments. The question of whether C is strongly typed or not is dependent on the definition of "strongly typed." And in the programming language theory world, there is no generally accepted definition of "strongly typed." In fact, the term is largely out of favor because it lacks a clear meaning. There are some people who take it to mean that the language does not contain any mechanisms to subvert the type system, and by that definition C is weakly typed. Others take it as a synonym for "statically typed" which means that every term has a static type. By this definition C is strongly typed. Or it might mean some other thing.

Unless all parties to the conversation agree on the specific meaning, the conversation is likely to be ... difficult.

Marshall Received on Thu Oct 12 2006 - 18:15:22 CDT