home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Xref: sparky comp.lang.c++:20066 comp.object:5107
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.object
- Path: sparky!uunet!pipex!bnr.co.uk!bnrgate!bcars267!bcarh680!tims
- From: tims@bcarh680.bnr.ca (Tim Spurway)
- Subject: Re: Strong typing (was: Re: Pros and cons of C++)
- Message-ID: <1993Jan27.210158.21849@bnr.ca>
- Sender: tims@bnr.ca (Tim Spurway)
- Nntp-Posting-Host: bcarh680
- Organization: Bell-Northern Research, Ottawa, Canada
- References: <TMB.93Jan14144656@arolla.idiap.ch> <C1G9H4.HsA@unix.portal.com> <1993Jan27.082721.3841@nwnexus.WA.COM>
- Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 21:01:58 GMT
- Lines: 21
-
- In article <1993Jan27.082721.3841@nwnexus.WA.COM> markmc@halcyon.com (Mark McWiggins) writes:
- >samantha@shell.portal.com (Samantha Atkins) writes:
- >
- >>Am I going askew here or is it as it seems to me that so called strong typing
- >>creates an untenable mess if you seriously attempt its use now and for the
- >>future?
- >
- >Recompilation is an "untenable mess"? True, with CPUs even fast as they
- >are now and tools relatively dumb, you can do unnecessary recompilation.
- >
- >But give me this any day over my customer calling from Buenos Aires
- >saying "What's this 'method not found' mean?" as in Smalltalk.
- >
-
- But give me this any day over my customer calling from England saying
- "What's this 'Segmentation fault: core dumped' mean?" as in C++. :)
-
-
- Tim Spurway
- tims@bnr.ca
-
-