Ranges

[Yigal Chripun]

Lutger wrote:
> 
> It's called structural typing in static languages which is almost the same 
> but not quite. In duck typing, you can pass an object which does not 
> implement the 'required' interface and this is not checked until a missing 
> method is actually called. Another way of looking at it is that the 
> interface is determined by the path of execution, which is even more 
> flexible than structural typing.
>  

This is why i don't like it in static languages. I like my type system 
and want the compiler to check my code.