Yahoo Web Search

  1. About 450,000 search results

  1. A weakly typed language has looser typing rules and may produce unpredictable or even erroneous results or may perform implicit type conversion at runtime. Advocates of dynamically typed (generally "weakly typed") languages find such concerns to be overblown and believe that static typing actually introduces an exponentially larger set of problems and inefficiencies. [2]

    • typedef Does Not Introduce A New Type, Just An Alias
    • Get Rid of This article?
    • C++ Example
    • Example Is Not Proper C++ Code
    • Contradictory Definitions

    so this cannot be used as an example of a weak typing. 1. I took this out. Not only does typedef just introduce an alias, but the example as given is nonsensical. "typedef int Date;" gives you no indication (formal or informal) of how this "Date" is supposed to be stored as an integer, so as an example of typing it's inherently flawed. If you want ...

    The term "weak typing" is largely meaningless, in that it conflates dynamically typed languages such as JavaScript with languages such as C that simply have no type safety (or are type-safe only at the memory-is-a-sequence-of-bytes level). Clements (talk) 06:59, 6 January 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply] 1. That is true! However, I see the current easily rea...

    This actually a bad example. The reader might think that a C++ compiler will give an error because 1 isn't a number used by the enumeration. The However, compilation will also fail for b = 2. The idea is that enum is strongly-typed because DOG is a type of animal, not 2. Trying this in C will fail all together. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ...

    The example given is not proper C++ code. It should be using a reinterpret_cast rather than a C-style cast. This is a good example of an incorrect use of C++ though. C-style cast should not be used in C++ at all, there is a good reason for the compiler to give you a warning. It either needs to be considered as C or be changed to use reinterpret_...

    This article implies that weak typing means that any implicit conversion is allowed, even if there is plenty of checking elsewhere. The strong typing article indicatesthat strong typing just means some checking is done. Thus, the one definition is not the opposite of the other. 1Z (talk) 16:37, 22 October 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    • Unclear Introduction
    • Dead Source
    • Or
    • Coercion's Definition by Aahz Contradicts The Definition in Type Conversion
    • Is Python Strongly typed?
    • Multiple Incompatible Definitions
    • Remove 'Strong' and 'Weak' from Info-Boxes

    The introduction should explain more clearly what weak typing and dynamically typed variables mean. (talk) 07:00, 18 May 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    Now I am not good with this wikipedia thingy, I'll be the first to admit to this. But it needs to be said that the source 6 ( page 3) is no longer available.I've got no clue on how to fix this but it should be replaced with this URL:

    It looks like there's a lot of OR on this page. Since strong/weak typing doesn't have a single accepted definition, all examples should be backed by reliable sources, but most aren't. QVVERTYVS (hm?) 15:11, 17 June 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply] 1. Yes, "strong" and "weak" typing is just an attempt to simplify Type_system#Type_checking. 2. I don't think an...

    Type conversion#Implicit type conversion says (specifically WRT C-like languages) "Implicit type conversion, also known as coercion, is an automatic type conversion by the compiler", which contradicts Aahz's definition.In case the former definition is the one usually used (i am not an expert), i think that the reference to Aahz's example should be ...

    At the beginning of the text, it is said:"A weakly typed language has looser typing rules and may produce unpredictable results or may perform implicit type conversion at runtime." And later:"Smalltalk, Perl, Ruby, Python, and Self are all "strongly typed" in the sense that typing errors are prevented at runtime and they do little implicit type con...

    Doing some research on the subject, I found a very pertinent answer on StackOverflow (answered Dec 9 '16 at 16:57 by ikegami): There are eight incompatible definitions for what it means to be strongly-typed, so what should we write on the Wikipedia page?- A list of all pos...

    The info-boxes for many programming languages on Wikipedia (at least Python, C, Java, JavaScript, PHP, Swift, Rust, C# and Go, but not C++ or TypeScript) declare their typing systems to be 'strong' or 'weak'. This page, (or make it pretty clear that the...

  2. People also ask

    What is weak typing?

    Is manifest typing a weakly typed language?

    What is a strong typed programming language?

    What are weakly typed languages?

  3. › wiki › weak_typingweak typing - Wiktionary

    weak typing (uncountable) (computing, programming) A system that does not place any restriction on the interactions between objects of different data types. Antonyms . strong typing; Hypernyms . typing; Translations

  4. Nov 27, 2008 · Weak typing means that you don't specify what type a variable is, and strong typing means you give a strict type to each variable. Each has its advantages, with weak typing (or dynamic typing, as it is often called), being more flexible and requiring less code from the programmer.

    Usage example

    $message = "you are visitor number ".strval($count);
  5. › wiki › Duck_typingDuck typing - Wikipedia

    Template, or generic functions or methods apply the duck test in a static typing context; this brings all the advantages and disadvantages of static versus dynamic type checking in general. Duck typing can also be more flexible in that only the methods actually called at runtime need to be implemented, while templates require implementations of all methods that can not be proven unreachable at compile time .

  1. Searches related to Weak typing wikipedia

    strong and weak typing wikipedia