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=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII X-Google-Thread: fac41,9a0ff0bffdf63657 X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,9a0ff0bffdf63657 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public X-Google-Thread: f43e6,9a0ff0bffdf63657 X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,4b06f8f15f01a568 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: schlegel@pella.informatik.uni-rostock.de (Juergen Schlegelmilch) Subject: Re: Types vs classes (was Re: Module size (was Re: Software landmines)) Date: 1998/09/07 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 388620764 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit References: <6snlos$bh6$1@hirame.wwa.com> <904912650snz@nezumi.demon.co.uk> <35EFFB78.21BBBED6@ksc.nasa.gov> <6spfvf$nun$1@hirame.wwa.com> <6spojo$8ir$1@uuneo.neosoft.com> <35F0702D.E4F66E07@s054.aone.net.au> <6sq6jv$bj4$1@uuneo.neosoft.com> <35F0BBA9.7AD521DA@s054.aone.net.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Organization: University of Rostock, Germany Mime-Version: 1.0 Reply-To: schlegel@Informatik.Uni-Rostock.de Newsgroups: comp.lang.eiffel,comp.object,comp.software-eng,comp.lang.ada Date: 1998-09-07T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: On Sat, 05 Sep 1998, Loryn Jenkins wrote: >No. Not about types. But I did have a point about OO. (Although, if you >classify types as the interface, then I suppose my point about Smalltalk >was incorrect. I merely mentioned it because I read your comment about >types, and immediately thought, "Smalltalk is not typed," per se. >Thinking about it. I think I was simply wrong about this. Sorry.) Not again! Smalltalk _is_ typed, in that every element in a Smalltalk program has a well-defined type. What's more, you simply write ill-typed code because Smalltalk is rather strict in its type-checking; there is no equivalent to a typecast, let alone an unsafe one. It is better than C++ in this respect. The only point one can make with respect to types in Smalltalk is that the type-checking is done at run-time. Concerning your point about OO[P], according to Meyer (in OOSC1/2), classes are implementations of ADTs so I think they are more than just types. Just my $0.01 :-) J�rgen -- +-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ Dipl.-Inf. Juergen Schlegelmilch University of Rostock email: schlegel@Informatik.Uni-Rostock.de Computer Science Department http://www.informatik.uni-rostock.de/~schlegel Database Research Group Tel: ++49 381 498 3402 18051 Rostock Fax: ++49 381 498 3426 Germany +-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+