[serichsen]

The following shows a common misconception:

"There is no reason why you cannot combine strong types or optional types with LISP, in fact, there are already LISP dialects out there that did this."

Common Lisp already has strong, dynamic, optional types.

"Strong" means: there is no implicit type conversion.

"Dynamic" means: runtime things (objects) have a type, not necessarily the (static) variables that hold them. This is also called "late binding".

"Optional" means: you need not specify a type for everything; types can be inferred from context.

[maaku]

> "There is no reason why you cannot combine strong types or optional types with LISP, in fact, there are already LISP dialects out there that did this."

> Common Lisp already has strong, dynamic, optional types.

Isn't that what he said? Common Lisp is a dialect of Lisp.