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: 109fba,b87849933931bc93
X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public
X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,b87849933931bc93
X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public
X-Google-Thread: 103376,b87849933931bc93
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Thread: fac41,b87849933931bc93
X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public
X-Google-Thread: 114809,b87849933931bc93
X-Google-Attributes: gid114809,public
From: jur@topdog.cs.umbc.edu (Jacqueline U. Robertson)
Subject: Re: OO, C++, and something much better!
Date: 1997/01/28
Message-ID: <5cm364$dc2@topdog.cs.umbc.edu>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 212872831
references: <JSA.97Jan16141937@alexandria> <32ED02EE.22E2@netright.com>
 <32ED2448.685A@parcplace.com> <32EE20A3.755D@netright.com>
organization: University of Maryland Baltimore County.
nntp-posting-user: jur
newsgroups: 
 comp.object,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.smalltalk,comp.lang.eiffel
Date: 1997-01-28T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Keywords: 
Cc: 

In article <32EE20A3.755D@netright.com>,
David Hanley  <david_nospam@netright.com> wrote:
>> 
>	I have.  All other things being equal, there are fewer errors that can
>happen in a static typed system, as opposed to a dynamially typed
>system.  Your refusal to accept this simple arguement makes you appear
>as if you have some kind of religous attachment to your system.
>
>	Let's start very simply; is the above system true or false?
>
Depends - are we including C and C++ here ?  In either language, I have static 
type checking, but I can use casting to defeat that type checking - thus,
I get NONE of the benefits of static typing, and also none of the benefits
of dynamic checks (as is done in Smalltalk).  

IMHO, he arument runs like this:  In the case of Smalltalk, the 'cost' of
adding static typing  ( in terms of reduced flexibility and slower
development time ) is not worth the 'gain'of static typing.  To some
extent, this is a subjective statement - but having used C, C++,
and Smalltalk extensively, IMHO development is more rapid and
more safe (less error prone) in Smalltalk than in C or C++.

Howvere, choice of language is not that simple.  If I need to build a 
DLL callable from the OS, then my language of choice is not an option.
As with all things, pick the right tool for the right job.



James A. Robertson
email: jamesr@parcplace.com
phone: 410 952-0471

<note that I am posting through my wife's account.  I don't claim to speak for
her>






















>-- 
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>David Hanley, Software Developer, NetRight technologies.
>My employer pays me for my opinions; nonetheless he does not share all
>of them
>E-mail address munged to defeat automailers, Delete _nospam