Have a look at Io.

[Z-Man]

Meriton: Yes, I guess we're aware of that. It's a tradeoff, as usual. I think that we'll pick the right parts of the project to be implemented in script; speed is not the only concern, it's also where it is easier/safer to implement something. I, for one, prefer honest weak typing of a scripting language over equivalent C++ code using lots of dynamic casts or void pointers.

[meriton]

Nemo:
I don't know Smalltalk, sorry. Of course, tool support is not just a matter of the language or of static typing. But the specific kind of functions I mentioned, are there tools for them for Smalltalk? Can I have a renaming refactoring of List::Initialize when there also is a Thread::Initialize?

z-man:
I agree dynamic typing is the right choice for a scripting language, and I agree that we need a scripting language. I was pointing out the other side of the trade-off because I simply can't stand overly simplistic arguments

But why does the equivalent code have "lots of dynamic casts or void pointers"? That sounds like poor design to me

[Z-Man]

But why does the equivalent code have "lots of dynamic casts or void pointers"? That sounds like poor design to me

Exactly You get that, for example, if you have a stupid class hierarchy (like one you get when you refuse to use multiple inheritance where it would be appropriate because someone told you it is evil). Let's put this to rest, we seem to agree really.