Nate Meyvis

I don’t know why you’re using C++ (or, for that matter, why you think C++ is “strongly typed”) but I strongly suspect you could be taking a better approach here. Don’t mean this as snark, and I’m happy to help / pair-program if you like!

I'm using C++ to write a specific routine that is very computationally intensive because I can interface with R thanks to Rcpp and C++ is definitely more strongly typed than R.

Kudos to you for doing quantitative work, really. I'll bet you a dollar a pair of professional eyes could help (and I'm willing to be those eyes). And yes, I agree with your last claim, but it doesn't make C++ "strongly typed."

The routine itself is not very complicated, just computationally demanding, so what I could have used help with is Rcpp and RcppArmadillo, but it's working now so it's all good. As for whether C++ is "strongly typed", my impression is that there is no universally accepted

definition of this concept and that different people use it differently. But whatever I'm not hung up on the terminology, what I meant is just that C++ is strongly typed enough that the sort of things I described in my tweet can happen. In any case, I'll publish my code along

with the write-up, so if you want to have a look at it and offer advice I'd be grateful.

Sounds good! Just FWIW, I’ve gotten into trouble before making assumptions about operator behavior from how strongly typed I thought the language to be.

(E.g.: if you use Python 2, don’t think that the language’s weak typing entails that division of integers isn’t integer division!)