What is Expressiveness in a Computer Language

[Marshall]

Joachim Durchholz wrote:
>
> Hmm... I think this distinction doesn't cover all cases.
>
> Assume a language that
> a) defines that a program is "type-correct" iff HM inference establishes
> that there are no type errors
> b) compiles a type-incorrect program anyway, with an establishes
> rigorous semantics for such programs (e.g. by throwing exceptions as
> appropriate).
> The compiler might actually refuse to compile type-incorrect programs,
> depending on compiler flags and/or declarations in the code.
>
> Typed ("strongly typed") it is, but is it statically typed or
> dynamically typed?

I think what this highlights is the fact that our existing terminology
is not up to the task of representing all the possible design
choices we could make. Some parts of dynamic vs. static
a mutually exclusive; some parts are orthogonal. Maybe
we have reached the point where trying to cram everything
in two one of two possible ways of doing things isn't going
to cut it any more.

Could it be that the US two-party system has influenced our
thinking?</joke>


Marshall