Haskell has dynamic typing via the Data.Dynamic module, but I don't find it to be useful. I can't think of any reason why anyone would want dynamic typing, anyway. Eventually you need to know the type of your data, why not figure that out before you start the program running? (But if you disagree, Haskell is not going to stop you.)
No, it's not what I want thanks. It's not eager and it's not simple and it's pretty fiercely pure. What I am thinking of is something more like a functional Python, or a Scheme with a "nice" syntax.
Use Scheme for more than five minutes and I think you'll find you don't care about the syntax anymore. Plus you won't have to write your own language, which is always nice.
Thanks, but I have used Scheme for more than 5 minutes.
[edit: more generally, what is the point of this conversation? You've stated that you don't understand how anyone could want dynamic types, and that strict evaluation is a pain. It's pretty obvious that you want completely different things to me. Given that, are you really trying to help me here, or just being a bit of an asshole? You're welcome to disagree, but simply repeating your opinions as if they are somehow more valid than mine isn't helping anyone.]
He's not being an asshole, he's just trying to help. Perhaps if you were a bit more forthcoming about what you do want (or why you don't want X), his comments might be a bit more on target.
Well, at least my comments aren't one sentence saying how the other person is wrong with the overtone of "no, that's not good enough, I am a unique flower and eveyrone else is wrong".
