Revision as of 12:05, 1 February 2009 edit SineBot (talk \| contribs) Bots 2,564,768 edits m Signing comment by Pjrm - "→Examples of difficulties introduced by declarativeness?: new section" ← Previous edit		Revision as of 00:40, 30 April 2009 edit undo Qeny (talk \| contribs) 142 edits No edit summary Next edit →
Line 50: The above doesn't seem a good example of extra difficulty. I'm sure there better examples (maybe failure-driven I/O ?); can someone supply one? <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures\|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Pjrm\|Pjrm]] ([[User talk:Pjrm\|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Pjrm\|contribs]]) 12:04, 1 February 2009 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> == "Good" principles == It sounds a bit iffy to say that it's designed with "good" software engineering principles. This sounds like it's claiming that compiled, static-typed languages are always better than interpreted, dynamic-typed languages. -[[User:Qeny\|Qeny]] ([[User talk:Qeny\|talk]]) 00:40, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

Talk:Mercury (programming language): Difference between revisions