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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: fac41,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public X-Google-Thread: 114809,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid114809,public From: Richie Bielak <%nospam%richieb@calfp.com> Subject: Re: Static vs. Dynamic typing again (was Re: OO, C++, and something much better!) Date: 1997/01/28 Message-ID: <32EE2067.4929@calfp.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 212754598 x-nntp-posting-host: host029.nyc.interactive.net references: <32DF458F.4D5C@concentric.net> <32DF94DC.6FF8@watson.ibm.com> <32DFD972.37E4@concentric.net> <32E4FC5B.242C@watson.ibm.com> <32E6862D.608B@parcplace.com> <32E764D0.23D9@calfp.com> <32E7A686.56D@parcplace.com> <32E7BD57.2558@calfp.com> <32EE045D.E39@sdrc.com> x-nntp-posting-user: (Unauthenticated) content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii x-trace: 854466614/4440 organization: IBS Interactive, Inc. mime-version: 1.0 newsgroups: comp.lang.smalltalk,comp.lang.eiffel,comp.lang.ada,comp.object x-mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (X11; I; SunOS 5.4 sun4m) Date: 1997-01-28T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Mark Windholtz wrote: > > Richie Bielak wrote: > > > > but static typing _proves_ absence of certain kinds of errors. > > > > > What also wanted to say in my previous post is that static typing > > proves that there is no call in the program that will cause > > the "message not understood" error. > > > > Unless you CAST anywhere in your program. > Then the static language version of "message not understood" > is either an exception or a core dump. > [...] > This is my experience with C++ anyway. Please > comment if casting in Eiffel provides the same > opportunity for run-time errors. > > The consequences of such runtime errors are > less severe in Smalltalk because it will not > core dump (mostly). > Eiffel has no C-style casting. Instead Eiffel provides the "reverse assigment attempt" operator to do safe "downcasting" when needed. ...richie -- * richieb@netlabs.net - at home | Richie Bielak * * richieb@calfp.com - at work | * * Home page: http://www.netlabs.net/hp/richieb * * "Fight software piracy, use free software!" (me) *