- From: Mike Dierken <mike@DataChannel.com>
- Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2001 08:55:58 -0800
- To: "'Ken MacLeod'" <ken@bitsko.slc.ut.us>, xml-dist-app@w3.org
Received on Friday, 30 March 2001 11:56:35 UTC
> > > > (statically typed languages are sooo 20th century ;-) > > I don't believe the issue is between dynamic or static (did you mean > manifestly?) typed languages. Perl, for example, has no problem with > not having explicit type declarations (at least in the range we're > talking about with XML-RPC ;-). "Strongly typed", maybe? > Or is it a difference between 'early binding' and 'late binding'? Or 'automatic type conversion'?
Received on Friday, 30 March 2001 11:56:35 UTC