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: 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: 114809,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid114809,public From: jhd@herold.franken.de (Joachim Durchholz) Subject: Re: OO, C++, and something much better! Date: 1997/01/23 Message-ID: <6PQF-bm-3RB@herold.franken.de>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 211777589 references: newsgroups: comp.lang.eiffel,comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.smalltalk,comp.object Date: 1997-01-23T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Eric wrote: > What about if your program crashed because you tried to address a null > pointer? Does this mean you shouldn't use C or C++? Yes :) At least on the same basis - I prefer a working Smalltalk or C/C++ environment to a perfect (but hypothetical) one any day. > Almost all "message > not understood" errors are simply messages sent to nil (the moral > equivalent of a null pointer). This usually happens either when > something isn't initialized yet or it has been prematurely released - > certainly mot uncommon occurrences in the static typing world. This is the reason why I favor garbage collected systems over GC-free systems. This doesn't prevent uninitialized access, but it does take care of dangling references. > Real type > errors (e.g., those that a static typing system would actually catch) > rarely ever occur in Smalltalk. The simplicity and consistency of the > language drastically reduces the scenarios where a real type error would > occur. Hm, that's an interesting claim. Though of course your programs might have typing holes that you never got aware of, so I'm not sure about the soliditiy of the "rarely ever" bit in your statement. > But rather that guess about Smalltalk, why not give a try and see for > yourself? You can download Smalltalk Express (a fully functional 16-bit > Windows Smalltalk IDE) for free from http://www.objectshare.com. Well, dynamic typing isn't the only problem about Smalltalk. There's some efficiency problems, and it's difficult to strip a program to its essential components for distribution. (Note that dynamic typing makes both problems hard to solve.) Regards, -Joachim -- Joachim Durchholz, Hans-Herold-Str. 25, D-91074 Herzogenaurach, GERMANY