Sun, 20 Dec 2009 18:53:56 +0100, Lutger wrote: > I'm not sure, I don't think so. From what I understand, duck typing is > supposed to be dynamic, while structural and nominative typing are part > of a static type system. I meant the non-nominative kind of typing, > whatever it is. > > fwiw, this is what wikipedia says: > > "Duck typing is similar to but distinct from structural typing. > Structural typing is a static typing system that determines type > compatibility and equivalence by a type's structure, whereas duck typing > is dynamic and determines type compatibility by only that part of a > type's structure that is accessed during run time." > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duck_typing#Structural_type_systems
You don't need a named interfaces in structural type system. Only the members of the data type have any meaning.
