From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Marko Rauhamaa Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.user Subject: Re: A couple of questions about goops method parameters Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2014 03:20:52 +0300 Message-ID: <87egvoffh7.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net> References: <1409905923.9245.5.camel@Renee-desktop.suse> <871trpridm.fsf@izanagi.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me> <871trpkdbf.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net> <87bnqtiukx.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net> <878ulxgfa4.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1410049308 13889 80.91.229.3 (7 Sep 2014 00:21:48 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2014 00:21:48 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Carlos Pita , David Thompson , "guile-user@gnu.org" To: Panicz Maciej Godek Original-X-From: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Sep 07 02:21:41 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-user@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1XQQEe-0000lk-B3 for guile-user@m.gmane.org; Sun, 07 Sep 2014 02:21:40 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:36679 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XQQEd-000788-Mp for guile-user@m.gmane.org; Sat, 06 Sep 2014 20:21:39 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:57716) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XQQER-00077a-7E for guile-user@gnu.org; Sat, 06 Sep 2014 20:21:33 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XQQEL-0006Aa-3G for guile-user@gnu.org; Sat, 06 Sep 2014 20:21:27 -0400 Original-Received: from pacujo.net ([83.150.83.132]:42402) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XQQEK-000683-Rr for guile-user@gnu.org; Sat, 06 Sep 2014 20:21:21 -0400 Original-Received: from elektro.pacujo.net (192.168.1.200) by elektro.pacujo.net; Sun, 7 Sep 2014 03:20:52 +0300 Original-Received: by elektro.pacujo.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Sun, 7 Sep 2014 03:20:52 +0300 In-Reply-To: (Panicz Maciej Godek's message of "Sun, 7 Sep 2014 01:46:07 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.3 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x X-Received-From: 83.150.83.132 X-BeenThere: guile-user@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: General Guile related discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: guile-user-bounces+guile-user=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.user:11480 Archived-At: Panicz Maciej Godek : > The fact that C compiler performs static type checking has nothing to > do with its performance. It's only about detecting type errors. So for > example if you have code like: > > short f(); > > long g() { > return f(); > } > > the compiler will generate an error. (It actually doesn't. Try it.) You are right that C compilation would simply not be possible without static type information present. However, since Scheme can do everything C can without static type information, the principal justification for its existence is performance. That's why Guido van Rossum is tempted to add optional static type annotation to Python: it would make it possible replace Java/C# with Python. Marko