Re:Another non-argument in type systems
by lmm on Thursday October 25, 2012 @10:01AM
(#4697663)
Sure, having dynamic multityping allows one to express things that one cannot express in a dynamically unityped language. But I think the original point stands - a language with static multityping and dynamic multityping (not all staticly typed languages provide the latter, and they certainly don't all make it easy) is more expressive than one with static unityping and dynamic multityping.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
If you have a static type system and it's sound, it'll reject some programs that would execute without type errors, whereas a dynamically typed language will allow such programs to execute: it's what I called "dynamic expressivity". That's why saying "more expressive" without qualifying whether one is considering "static" or "dynamic" is problematic.