What is Expressiveness in a Computer Language

[Vesa Karvonen]

In comp.lang.functional Chris Smith <cdsmith at twu.net> wrote:
[...]
> Knowing that it'll cause a lot of strenuous objection, I'll nevertheless 
> interject my plea not to abuse the word "type" with a phrase like 
> "dynamically typed".  If anyone considers "untyped" to be perjorative, 
> as some people apparently do, then I'll note that another common term is 
> "type-free," which is marketing-approved but doesn't carry the 
> misleading connotations of "dynamically typed."  We are quickly losing 
> any rational meaning whatsoever to the word "type," and that's quite a 
> shame.
[...]

FWIW, I agree and have argued similarly on many occasions (both on the
net (e.g. http://groups.google.fi/group/comp.programming/msg/ba3ccfde4734313a?hl=fi&)
and person-to-person).  The widely used terminology (statically /
dynamically typed, weakly / strongly typed) is extremely confusing to
beginners and even to many with considerable practical experience.

-Vesa Karvonen