Marshall wrote: > > > > This means that there's a sense in which the language that the > > programmer programs in is not the same language that has a formal > > semantic definition. As I mentioned in another post, programmers are > > essentially mentally programming in a richer language - a language which > > has informal (static) types - but the code they write down elides this > > type information, or else puts it in comments. > > > > [...] > > > > In this context, the term "latently-typed language" refers to the > > language that a programmer experiences, not to the subset of that > > language which is all that we're typically able to formally define.
That language is not a subset, if at all, it's the other way round, but I'd say they are rather incomparable. That is, they are different languages. > That is starting to get a bit too mystical for my tastes. I have to agree. \sarcasm One step further, and somebody starts calling C a "latently memory-safe language", because a real programmer "knows" that his code is in a safe subset... And where he is wrong, dynamic memory page protection checks will guide him. - Andreas -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list