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: fac41,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public X-Google-Thread: 109fba,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,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: Eric Clayberg Subject: Re: OO, C++, and something much better! Date: 1997/01/28 Message-ID: <32EED858.4BDE@parcplace.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 212950178 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> <32E4E6E1.437E@dstsystems.com> <32E8C18F.354B@sdrc.com> <32ECF63D.5EB@netright.com> <32EE2FEE.62FE@p <32EE8415.2F5B@netright.com> content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii organization: ParcPlace-Digitalk, Inc. mime-version: 1.0 reply-to: clayberg@parcplace.com newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.smalltalk,comp.lang.eiffel,comp.lang.ada,comp.object x-mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; U) Date: 1997-01-28T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: David Hanley wrote: > There are losts of cases in C/C++,java,etc where passing null as an > argment is just fine as well. Yes, I know that. I use the three languages you mention frequently. Heck, I've even done commercial application development in Java and work for a company that actually has several commercial Java packages on the market. > No kidding. I still don't understand your implication that it is ok, > and has somethin to do with dynamic typing. Huh? What implication? I was merely responding to your comment: > So smalltalk will happily pass a message to the nill object, and the > progrm will chug along just fine? Remember? > So are you under the impression that ST is the only language that can > trap null pointer writes? Not at all. Again, I was merely responding to your comment which was clearly in err. > And what exactly does this have to do with static and dynamic typing? Not much. Again, I was merely responding to your comment which was clearly in err. -Eric