Anonymous user
Talk:Language Comparison Table: Difference between revisions
→Perl 6 - Strongly typed: Ta!
m (→Perl 6 - Strongly typed: (forgot siggy)) |
(→Perl 6 - Strongly typed: Ta!) |
||
Line 193:
:Any or all such overloaded signatures may therefore be shadowed in an inner scope, including the coercive generic signatures. One of the strong design principles of Perl 6 is that every lexical scope know exactly what language it is using, where "exactly" does not preclude genericity, but only accidental genericity. Therefore lexical scoping is how we override anything in the outer language and produce a new language in an inner lexical scope. Since Perl 6 is designed to be completely mutable in this sense, such an inner language can appear to be as weakly typed as you like, but since all of the outer primitives are, in fact, strongly typed, Perl 6 is better characterized as strongly typed.
:But finally, I'd like to point out that the very first thing the definition in question says is that type strength is a "vague term". <tt>:-)</tt> --[[User:TimToady|TimToady]] 23:44, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
::Thanks TimToady for the answer. I'm going to have to read this again to digest it, but then I ''did'' think my comment was probably asking to reveal more than just the tip of the iceberg. (Sometime soon I'm going to have to learn more of Perl6 as it continues to pique my interest). --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] 03:13, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
| |||