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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,695b28bb1b8c553c
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news4.google.com!feeder.news-service.com!news.motzarella.org!motzarella.org!news.motzarella.org!Colin_Paul_Gloster
From: Colin Paul Gloster <Colin_Paul_Gloster@ACM.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Static vs Dynamic binding and its effect on maintenance of
 software
Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2009 13:57:34 +0000
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID: <Pine.WNT.4.64.0901011356170.21104@abril>
References: <CZ17l.4150$jZ1.3155@flpi144.ffdc.sbc.com>
Reply-To: Colin Paul Gloster <Colin_Paul_Gloster@ACM.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Trace: news.eternal-september.org
 U2FsdGVkX1+mgGonU9CF1HRWHnmoJa8V8ZIEDyt3mK2k6lM+5lvwKHDSe1IH75w355nG7zxx1Y6Boa2UM2bVzmU8Ma5+CZovVn+DZFwPZnHeEUWRI5Y0lH8sTLPZEQ5DHf7Dy/Ykp5zZsMN3gnV4dw==
X-Complaints-To: Please send complaints to abuse@motzarella.org with full
 headers
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2009 13:44:49 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To: <CZ17l.4150$jZ1.3155@flpi144.ffdc.sbc.com>
X-Auth-Sender: 
 U2FsdGVkX18O6FMhWkdPokPGRuHW2spZLfjW/ftTi84lLHNN3wli3nrYkmS0pcAErsTfDaRx4RU=
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Bl7ycbTw9mb5tVLFi6ZZiQ57kPw=
X-X-Sender: Colin_Paul_Gloster@gian.fis.uc.pt
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.ada:3168
Date: 2009-01-01T13:57:34+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Thu, 1 Jan 2009, Nasser Abbasi wrote:

|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|"From "Object-Oriented programming and Java",  ISBN 981-308-396-4            |
|                                                                             |
|I am posting this on Ada group for comments, since Ada is well known for its |
|static binding more than any other language I know.                          |
|                                                                             |
|"Static binding is limited and may lead to difficulty in software            |
|maintenance. Dynamic binding, on the other hand, provides design flexibility |
|and may enhance software maintainability"                                    |
|                                                                             |
|Here is a screen shot of the page where the above was taken                  |
|http://12000.org/tmp/010109/static_binding.png                               |
|                                                                             |
|I understand how dynamic binding can be more 'flexible', but why static      |
|binding "may lead to difficulty in software maintenance" ? I do not          |
|understand the rational behind this.                                         |
|                                                                             |
|I would have thought than dynamic binding would do that more than static     |
|binding?"                                                                    |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|

I agree that static binding is better.