Re: Drifting towards a statically typed Emacs Lisp. [Was: Introducing 'safety' compilation parameter]

[Emanuel Berg]

Andrea Corallo wrote:

> Because it can be informative (when there are types other
> than t), anyway you can control it with
> 'help-display-function-type' if you don't want to have it in
> the *Help* buffer.

Ah, so you already added what I asked for/suggested in my
other post. Okay good, all the better then.

>> If this is the way Emacs Lisp is to develop, can't we at
>> least have an open discussion about it and a positive
>> decision taken, rather than letting it "just happen"? As is
>> already clear, I see static typing in Emacs Lisp, except,
>> perhaps, on a very limited scale, as a Bad Thing.
>
> Again, there's no plan to make elisp statically typed.
> I agree with you this is a tool to be used on a limited
> scale, if this is not clear enough from the doc now I guess
> we can just improve it.

I think it is cool with the inferred type system, as well as
the possibility to have explicit types for functions,
arguments, etc, in source.

Those types could be used in many different ways at compile as
well as run time, that doesn't mean we must "make Elisp
statically typed".

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal