From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 109fba,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: fac41,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 114809,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid114809,public From: Marc Robertson Subject: Re: OO, C++, and something much better! Date: 1997/01/21 Message-ID: <32E4E6E1.437E@dstsystems.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 211385036 references: <32DF458F.4D5C@concentric.net> <32DF94DC.6FF8@watson.ibm.com> <32DFD972.37E4@concentric.net> <5bphq4$5js@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU> <32E05FAF.47BA@concentric.net> <5buodl$bci@boursy.news.erols.com> <32E2FEC7.2F7B@concentric.net> <5bvncj$gqg$1@A-abe.resnet.ucsb.edu> <32E47B4B.56D9@concentric.net> content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii organization: DST Technologies mime-version: 1.0 reply-to: marobertson@dstsystems.com newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.smalltalk,comp.lang.eiffel,comp.lang.ada,comp.object x-mailer: Mozilla 2.02E (OS/2; I) Date: 1997-01-21T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Alan Lovejoy wrote: > > Graham Hughes wrote: > > [snip] > > > If OO is about conceptual separation of code into independent modules, > > why should the modules be concerned about what somebody else gives them? > > Why should they manually check that the object is capable of the > > operations demanded when the compiler can? > > This is a non argument. Since someone must check, there is no difference in > principle whether that someone is the compiler or the run-time system. It's > an implemenation difference, not a difference in kind. There is a difference in practice. If the compiler detects an error, the only one that has to worry about it is the developer. If an error is present that the run-time system has to handle, all users are potentially affected by it. There have been any number of studies( unfortunately, I don't have access to them here, so I can't quote them ) that indicate that the cost to correct a problem increases dramatically the later in the development process you detect it. The sooner problems can be eliminated, the less it costs to eliminate them! -- All opinions expressed are my own Marc Robertson email: Principal Analyst marobertson@dstsystems.com DST Technologies Kansas City, MO USA