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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,99f33f51845a7793
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-11-22 03:44:35 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!newsfeed.direct.ca!look.ca!newsfeed.icl.net!lnewspeer00.lnd.ops.eu.uu.net!lnewspeer01.lnd.ops.eu.uu.net!lnewsifeed01.lnd.ops.eu.uu.net!lnewspost00.lnd.ops.eu.uu.net!emea.uu.net!not-for-mail
From: "David Crocker" <dcrocker@imsltd.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
References: <3be27344$0$227$ed9e5944@reading.news.pipex.net>
 <MRyE7.10079$xS6.13799@www.newsranger.com>
 <x7vofmki7mm.fsf@smaug.pushface.org> <3BE42900.7590E899@adaworks.com>
 <3be65f4c$0$237$ed9e5944@reading.news.pipex.net>
 <tuoetohbaump12@corp.supernews.com> <x7vu1w2bil4.fsf@smaug.pushface.org>
 <tuvpi2sl62cbdf@corp.supernews.com> <x7vy9lbxih0.fsf@smaug.pushface.org>
 <tv55kecu56i1f@corp.supernews.com> <x7vu1vv6b02.fsf@smaug.pushface.org>
 <3BF6E4DF.FA47ACDB@adaworks.com> <x7vd72gi0zm.fsf@smaug.pushface.org>
 <tvi8pl3ebdgqb2@corp.supernews.com> <3BF93F0F.D5E4D0B7@Raytheon.com>
 <u3d3aeavn.fsf@gsfc.nasa.gov> <3BFA6BDC.26E7557E@Raytheon.com>
 <3bfa84ca$0$8514$ed9e5944@reading.news.pipex.net>
 <tvl95d3asnbcd4@corp.supernews.com>
Subject: Re: 'withing' problem [code generation]
Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2001 11:49:02 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600
Message-ID: <3bfce4f9$0$8509$ed9e5944@reading.news.pipex.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: andrew.imsltd.com
X-Trace: 1006429433 reading.news.pipex.net 8509 194.202.27.87
X-Complaints-To: abuse@uk.uu.net
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:16850
Date: 2001-11-22T11:49:02+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Matthew Heaney" <mheaney@on2.com> wrote in message
news:tvl95d3asnbcd4@corp.supernews.com...

<snip>

> You cannot compare static languages like Ada95 and C++ to dynamic
languages
> like Java or Eiffel.  They were designed to solve different problems, and
> hence reflect different philosophies.

Sorry, you are making a big mistake if you believe that Eiffel and Java are
dynamic languages. Maybe you are thinking of Smalltalk. Eiffel and Java are
just as amenable to static type checking as C++ and Ada 95. The only feature
of Java that might be considered dynamic (and the results not statically
checkable) is the facility to load at run time new class files that didn't
exist when the program was compiled (or even when the program was loaded).