I'm sorry, but this feels totally like a strawman argument. Whoever said that JavaScript is "untyped"? Whoever said that ANY language is "untyped"?? In fact, what in the heck are you even referring to when you say "untyped"??? I've never heard of such a thing. There are strongly-typed languages. And there are dynamically typed languages. But every single language I've ever heard of has types.
While I really appreciate the condescending reply, the simple fact is that I did read the whole post. And I don't need to read all of the comments before I supply my own comment.
I'm sorry, Adam, some answers to your questions are in the post, so I thought you didn't read it. Answering your questions:
Lots of people classify Javascript as untyped, from people in this comment section to people in the linked SO discussion and Brendan Eich himself (which I mention in the post).
Lot of computer scientists have talked about untyped languages, that don't have a type system, and some examples are found in formal languages like Turing machines, to some shell languages, assembly languages, esoteric languages or pure logic languages, where the absence of type restrictions makes them fall in the untyped category.
Strong, weak, static and dynamic are terms applicable to languages with a type system, so when a language just lacks one, they don't apply.
I hope to have answered your questions.
About the strawman, I guess I just had bad luck to stumble upon people that you have not, saying things that made me write this. No need to invalidate my point.
I'm sorry, but this feels totally like a strawman argument. Whoever said that JavaScript is "untyped"? Whoever said that ANY language is "untyped"?? In fact, what in the heck are you even referring to when you say "untyped"??? I've never heard of such a thing. There are strongly-typed languages. And there are dynamically typed languages. But every single language I've ever heard of has types.
Please read the whole post and other comments. Thanks for your comment.
While I really appreciate the condescending reply, the simple fact is that I did read the whole post. And I don't need to read all of the comments before I supply my own comment.
I'm sorry, Adam, some answers to your questions are in the post, so I thought you didn't read it. Answering your questions:
Lots of people classify Javascript as untyped, from people in this comment section to people in the linked SO discussion and Brendan Eich himself (which I mention in the post).
Lot of computer scientists have talked about untyped languages, that don't have a type system, and some examples are found in formal languages like Turing machines, to some shell languages, assembly languages, esoteric languages or pure logic languages, where the absence of type restrictions makes them fall in the untyped category.
Strong, weak, static and dynamic are terms applicable to languages with a type system, so when a language just lacks one, they don't apply.
I hope to have answered your questions.
About the strawman, I guess I just had bad luck to stumble upon people that you have not, saying things that made me write this. No need to invalidate my point.
"Mmmmmmmmmmmm"