Originally Posted by lilsparky
since lua is effectively typeless
|
It's not. It's a strongly typed language with dynamic typing. Saying it's effectively typeless is no more useful, nor accurate, than saying C is effectively typeless (since it's weakly typed).
The important piece of information you are trying to convey is that in lua, the type of variables isn't explicitly declared, which is something entirely separate and distinct from whether there is an effective lack of types.
I understand why this issue comes up with folks -- Lua is more generous with allowing arithmetic values to be used in string contexts than someone might otherwise expect, and many people have the misfortune to have mostly programmed only with some combination of Java, C, and C++ and therefore don't always think clearly about the ideas of implicit type declarations and dynamic typing. But I think calling Lua "effectively typeless" conveys misinformation about a very practical aspect of CS theory and the Lua language.