Please, read the whole post.
About untyped languages: some shell scripting languages are untyped (type-like restrictions come from subprocesses and not from a native type system), some esoteric languages are untyped, assembly languages are untyped, pure Prolog is untyped, Turing machines are untyped. There might be other examples I don't know personally.
Thanks for your comment.
My main references for the subject are Programming Language Theory textbooks written by L. Cardelli or R. Harper. They and other authors (I would need to check again the bibliography for the names) use 'untyped' to refer to languages where values have no types, or a single type, and therefore don't apply type restrictions of any kind.
I only know one formal name "untyped lambda calculus". But only because there is typed lambda calculus. So obviously normal lambda calculus is untyped.
Assembly have strings (sequance of ASCII characters) and numbers so I don't think it's untyped unless you treat strings are sequence of bytes that are numbers. Prolog probably is untyped since it only have sentances and words.
I was mainly refered to modern languages that are commonly used. No one will compare JavaScript to Prolog or Shell language.
Assembly is not a language, it's a family of languages, and the ones that use characters and numbers, do it as syntax sugar, but in the end don't have a type system that imposes restrictions on how you operate them, so they still adjust to the definition of un typed languages.
Shell languages are modern, thousand of developers use Bash daily.
And that of no one will compare that languages, it depends. I personally have seen comparisons between all kind of languages that I have found relevant. "Modern languages" is something really, really unspecific.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
Please, read the whole post.
About untyped languages: some shell scripting languages are untyped (type-like restrictions come from subprocesses and not from a native type system), some esoteric languages are untyped, assembly languages are untyped, pure Prolog is untyped, Turing machines are untyped. There might be other examples I don't know personally.
Thanks for your comment.
Is there an actual accepted definition of 'untyped' somewhere or is it one of those terms that only carry meaning within a very specific context?
My main references for the subject are Programming Language Theory textbooks written by L. Cardelli or R. Harper. They and other authors (I would need to check again the bibliography for the names) use 'untyped' to refer to languages where values have no types, or a single type, and therefore don't apply type restrictions of any kind.
I only know one formal name "untyped lambda calculus". But only because there is typed lambda calculus. So obviously normal lambda calculus is untyped.
Assembly have strings (sequance of ASCII characters) and numbers so I don't think it's untyped unless you treat strings are sequence of bytes that are numbers. Prolog probably is untyped since it only have sentances and words.
I was mainly refered to modern languages that are commonly used. No one will compare JavaScript to Prolog or Shell language.
Assembly is not a language, it's a family of languages, and the ones that use characters and numbers, do it as syntax sugar, but in the end don't have a type system that imposes restrictions on how you operate them, so they still adjust to the definition of un typed languages.
Shell languages are modern, thousand of developers use Bash daily.
And that of no one will compare that languages, it depends. I personally have seen comparisons between all kind of languages that I have found relevant. "Modern languages" is something really, really unspecific.