From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3 Received: from discorde.inria.fr (discorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.38]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39F60BC0A for ; Fri, 22 Dec 2006 21:20:02 +0100 (CET) Received: from host15.ipowerweb.com (host15.ipowerweb.com [66.235.219.115]) by discorde.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id kBMKK0m0015894 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NO) for ; Fri, 22 Dec 2006 21:20:01 +0100 Received: from c-24-9-123-251.hsd1.co.comcast.net ([24.9.123.251] helo=apotheon.com) by host15.ipowerweb.com with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1Gxqs1-0004RG-45 for caml-list@yquem.inria.fr; Fri, 22 Dec 2006 12:19:57 -0800 Received: by apotheon.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 99C1F333CC; Fri, 22 Dec 2006 13:19:37 -0700 (MST) Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2006 13:19:37 -0700 From: Chad Perrin To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Subject: Re: strong/weak typing terminology (was Re: [Caml-list] Scripting in ocaml) Message-ID: <20061222201937.GD23003@apotheon.com> References: <1166709162.5653.11.camel@rosella.wigram> <458AA143.3090303@hq.idt.net> <20061221202520.GG9440@apotheon.com> <20061221221650.GL9440@apotheon.com> <3EC73FC3-41A6-4FB1-9549-29286A6568CC@epfl.ch> <1166811403.6555.46.camel@rosella.wigram> <4E1EAAC5-DC08-4A55-9AEB-0D5D3BE1C0EA@epfl.ch> <1166816522.7448.45.camel@rosella.wigram> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1166816522.7448.45.camel@rosella.wigram> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) X-Antivirus-Scanner: Clean mail though you should still use an Antivirus X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - host15.ipowerweb.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - yquem.inria.fr X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - apotheon.com X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: X-Miltered: at discorde with ID 458C3DF0.002 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail . ensmp . fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; ocaml:01 dumped:01 type-safety:01 type-safety:01 23,:98 wrote:01 typing:01 exception:01 caml-list:01 hacker:02 strong:96 weak:04 perhaps:04 ccd:94 ccd:94 On Sat, Dec 23, 2006 at 06:42:02AM +1100, skaller wrote: > > Your program is safe? Ok, so would you use it to > control a nuclear reactor? Do you really think anyone > cares if the reactor blows, whether the program > core dumped, failed to core dump, or threw an exception? That's health-safety, or life-safety, or something like that. It's not the same as type-safety. > > to me safe means 'cannot fail'. But perhaps i misunderstand: > it would be interesting to see another definition. You're right, in a sense: safety means "cannot fail". In the case of type-safety, however, all that means is that the type system "cannot fail". The caveat is that, of course, if you evade the type system in some way, its type-safety becomes to some extent immaterial. -- CCD CopyWrite Chad Perrin [ http://ccd.apotheon.org ] print substr("Just another Perl hacker", 0, -2);