[pmelendez]

I would be curious to see references that claims that dynamic and static typing are orthogonal with strongly typed systems, as “strongly type” is rather ambiguous and the only reason I used the term was because that was how Pascal was promoted back in the day (or at least how was taught to me)

From Wikipedia: In 1974, Liskov and S. Zilles defined a strongly-typed language as one in which "whenever an object is passed from a calling function to a called function, its type must be compatible with the type declared in the called function."

Note that the definition refers to type declaration, both being optional in Python and Common Lisp, so I wouldn’t use either as an example of strongly type languages.

[kazinator]

"whenever an object is passed" clearly refers to run-time. An object is not being passed when we are compiling the function call.

"declared in the function" clearly means that the function has an internal type check.

An interface declaration (Modula-2 interface file, C header file with prototypes) is not "in the function"; it's compile-time meta-data about a function.

A function call between separately compiled translation units has no idea what is in a function.

[Jtsummers]

You already found the wikipedia page, try reading it. See where it puts a lot of dynamically typed languages under the category of "strongly typed". You've decided it's a good enough source apparently.

But really, I used "strongly" in quotes deliberately. It's a terrible phrase since it means nothing in practice because it can mean too many things (as that same page notes) that often are at odds with each other.

> Note that the definition refers to type declaration, both being optional in Python and Common Lisp, so I wouldn’t use either as an example of strongly type languages.

Even this definition would potentially exclude SML and OCaml where types are inferred, not declared. So according to you those two languages are weakly typed? I think a lot of people would be surprised to learn that.

[epolanski]

Dynamic and static merely point to the fact that type analysis is either done at runtime or at compilation time.

It is an unrelated concept to which type rules will be applied by the software at runtime or compilation time.