Depending on the definition of "statically typed" to which you subscribe, the answer is "yes", "no" or "yes and no". "Is X statically typed?" is never the right question.
I wish I could find the document I once encountered. It had at least 10 different definitions for "statically typed language".
( See Re^11: Interesting read: "Why I use perl and still hate dynamic language weenies too" )
In reply to Re^11: Interesting read: "Why I use perl and still hate dynamic language weenies too"
by ikegami
in thread Interesting read: "Why I use perl and still hate dynamic language weenies too"
by ghenry
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |