Re:Dynamic type systems are not inherently more open
by zozbot234 on Sunday January 19, 2020 @08:00AM
(#22091211)
The hard part is not offering a "dynamic" type (which is generally just a variant type with a bunch of RuntimeType cases) but making the "static" and "dynamic" portions of the language truly, tightly interoperable. Generally, this implies that the compiler and runtime system should be able to correctly assign "blame" to some dynamic part of the program for a runtime type error that impacts "static" code, and this can be quite non-trivial in some cases.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
There are no comments on this comment yet.