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,c52c30d32b866eae
X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public
X-Google-Thread: 103376,2ea02452876a15e1
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,c52c30d32b866eae
X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public
From: Valery.Croizier@enst-bretagne.fr (Valery CROIZIER)
Subject: Re: Real OO
Date: 1996/04/09
Message-ID: <dphgutp2wi.fsf@monge.enst-bretagne.fr>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 146598658
distribution: world
sender: croisier@monge.enst-bretagne.fr
references: <4j9p3a$uo5@watnews1.watson.ibm.com> <DpBsG4.MIE@assip.csasyd.oz>
content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
organization: Telecom Bretagne
mime-version: 1.0
newsgroups: comp.lang.eiffel,comp.lang.ada,comp.object
Date: 1996-04-09T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Norman H. Cohen writes

> (a) It is impossible to write a routine that has such expectations.
>     [If so, Eiffel is less flexible than Ada.]
> [...]
> (c) A run-time error results immediately.
>     [If so, no different from Ada.]
> [...]

Unfortunately, Eiffel is not flexible enough to allow so dangerous  a
statement (Note: the *statement* is illegal, not the routine
definition) and your program won't have the pleasure of crashing at
run time. 
As a conclusion, if you prefer run time errors to compile time errors,
Eiffel is not for you.

--
Valery