"Strong typing vs. strong testing"

Ian Collins ian-news at hotmail.com
Thu Sep 30 21:35:56 CEST 2010

On 10/ 1/10 08:21 AM, Seebs wrote:
> On 2010-09-30, Keith Thompson<kst-u at mib.org>  wrote:
>> IMHO it's better to use prototypes consistently than to figure out the
>> rules for interactions between prototyped vs. non-prototyped function
>> declarations.
> Yes.  It's clearly undefined behavior to call a function through a
> pointer to a different type, or to call a function with the wrong number
> of arguments.  I am pretty sure at least one compiler catches this.

Any C++ compiler will refuse to accept it.

C isn't really a strongly typed language and having to support archaic 
non-prototyped function declarations makes thorough type checking 
extremely difficult if not impossible.

Ian Collins

More information about the Python-list mailing list