From: Chris Gehlker <canyonrat@...>
Date: 2002-09-30T02:37:40+09:00
Subject: Re: thoughts on typelessness


On Saturday, September 28, 2002, at 09:50 PM, William Djaja 
Tjokroaminata wrote:

> Now, the question is, have we fully examined the design space between 
> Ruby
> and C?  If we come out with a language that is 50% the easiness of Ruby
> and 50% of the performance of C, I don't think there is any useful
> effort.  However, if it turns out that we can create something that is 
> 80%
> the easiness of Ruby and at the same time 80% the performance of C, I
> think we really can call that a progress.
>

What about ObjC? Seems intuitively to be about 60-70% of the easiness 
and 80% of the performance.

> When we examine the design space between C and Ruby, then usually
> static/dynamic typing is the first thing to come to mind, as these two
> languages are exactly at the opposite spectrum in this respect.  And of
> course, then all those discussions (such as R) follow...
>

Interesting that ObjC opted for optional static typing.
-- 
We are all born originals - why is it so many of us die copies?
-Edward Young, poet (1683-1765)