Page 3 of 3 Now we come to a sideline in the language paradigm
story. There is a lot of talk about dynamic languages at the
moment. This is partly because until quite recently the dominant
languages Java, C++ and C# were static languages - so it's quite
a lot about a reaction to the old guard. The static/dynamic
distinction is a very difficult one to pin down precisely. In
the old days it could be summed up as the split into compiled
and interpreted languages but today it is more about a split in
the approach to how object oriented programming should be done.
The current meaning of Dynamic when applied to languages usually
refers to typing. When you create an object oriented language
you have to decide if it is going to be strongly or weakly
typed. Every object defines a type and in a strongly typed
language you specify exactly what type can be used in any given
place. If a function needs parameters that of type Apple you
can't call it used parameters that are Oranges. The alternative
approach is to allow obj