scotch

I don't think there's a clear-cut winner - it's mostly choice. Strong typing generally allows more solid, less-breakable code; weak typing generally allows quick prototyping and small scripts to be done at a faster pace. This is why I suggested a -strict flag (https://github.com/bendmorris/scotch/issues/3): if you decide that you're done prototyping, and would like to make what you're doing more explicit. Another method could possibly be being able to specify in-code that it's strict, perhaps something along the lines of "#flags: strict <...>" for flags always applied to that file? (Yes, that's ugly. I'm talking about the idea, not that particular incarnation of the idea) This would allow the best of both worlds, without trying to force them to play nice with each other in one file. However, even while avoiding mixing them in one file, t

I'm working on a functional programming language and debating the issue of strong vs. weak typing. This is a dynamically typed, interpreted language, so it seems to me that some of the benefits of strong typing (i.e., catching type errors at compile time) are irrelevant. Currently, for example, ("abc" + 5) will return "abc5", and ([1,2,3] + 4) will return [1,2,3,4]. The necessary conversions are done implicitly. What I generally hear, however, is that strong typing is preferred. So, I'd like to know: what are some pros/cons of strong and weak typing? Is strong typing always the correct choice? (For reference, the language I'm working on is Scotch: https://github.com/bendmorris/scotch)

I took your advice. Scotch officially moved over to Github - https://github.com/bendmorris/scotch