Julia vs. D?

[Ary Borenszweig via Digitalmars-d]

On 5/6/14, 10:41 AM, Chris wrote:
> On Tuesday, 6 May 2014 at 13:25:56 UTC, Ary Borenszweig wrote:
>> On 5/6/14, 8:23 AM, bearophile wrote:
>>> Paulo Pinto:
>>>
>>>> You can think of Julia as a dynamic language similar to Python, with
>>>> optional typing and for such a young language, a quite good JIT
>>>> compiler backed by the LLVM backend.
>>>
>>> Unlike dynamic languages, at running time all variables are strongly
>>> typed.
>>
>> What do you mean?
>
> Just a wild guess: that the compiler infers the type of a variable and
> turns it into a static type. That would increase the security during
> runtime (plugins, libraries, crackers).

Julia doesn't have a compiler. There's no compile-time and run-time 
distinction. But functions are jitted before execution.

I don't see how that means "variables are strongly typed". If you mean 
that at runtime they carry their type information, so do dynamic languages.