Re: [MUD-Dev] Mud Languages

[Jeff Kesselman <jeffk#tenetwork,com>]

At 07:59 PM 8/8/97 PST8PDT, you wrote:
>Err, okay. Strong and weak typing are actually wrong terms, in my
>opinion. The correct terms are static vs dynamic typing. In static

err, in my opinion Strong/wark typing is a separate issue from
static/dynamic typeing.

Classic C is a statically type-bound weakly typed langauge.
Perl is a dynamically type-bound weakly typed language.
Pascal is a statically type-bound strongly typed langauge.
JAVA is a dynamically type-bound strongly typed langauge/

Advantages of strong typing/weak typing are simple, though Im not gonna
pretend to conceal my bias so IMO warning... strongly typed languages give
much better error wraning.  Weakly typed languages let you get away with
sloppy programming and so you can get something to compile with less
attention to the (ocasionally pedantic) rules of types.  As you can see, I
don't thin the latter is worth the trade offs.

Dynamic type binding vs., static type binding basically allows for more
complete polymorphism at the run-time side.

JK
Jeff Kesselman
Snr. Game Integration Engineer
TEN -- The Total Entertainment Network -- www.ten.net

-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
     Version: 3.1
     GCS/CC/E/IT/MC d+(++)@ s: a C++++$ ULSC+++(++++)$ P++(+++)$ L++ 
     E--- W++$ N++$ o+ K--? w++(+++)$@>--- O+(++)>$ M+>$ !V PS++ PE+ 
     Y+ PGP- t+ 5+ X- R+(++)$>+++* tv+ b+>++ DI+++ !D G e++ h r+++ y+++
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ 

Speak Geek!
http://krypton.mankato.msus.edu/~hayden/geek.html