Re: Static vs Dynamic
From: Marco Antoniotti (marcoxa_at_cs.nyu.edu)
Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2004 11:50:34 -0500
Pascal Costanza wrote:
> Darren wrote:
>> Come on, you are quibbling.
> No, I am not.
>> Will your next complaint be that I didn't implement all known
>> operating systems as objects and therefore it will break if moved to
>> a Mac box or an AS/400?
> No, my next complaint will be the same as before: Your code is not
> object-oriented. I still think it's a hack. Recall that I've said that
> hacks aren't necessarily bad ideas, so I wonder what you are currently
> fighting against.
> The paper I have referred to is an illustration of OO principles and of
> the fact that using inheritance and design patterns doesn't make you an
> OO programmer. That's the only thing I am interested in here.
> If I were really, really, really concerned about finding out about the
> operating system my program is running on, I would check the *features*
> list. ;)
Which gives me a very nice handle for self-aggrandizing selfish
advertisment: check out the CL-ENVIRONMENT library in the CLOCC :)
-- Marco > > To stress this the last time: _This is not the topic of our discussion._ > > The topic is: What does static typing, especially Java's type system, > bring to the table? That's where we started from. > >> It's obvious to me you don't do real programming and probably >> couldn't see the value of such a thing in a real system. > > > I have insulted you, now you have insulted me. Can we call it quits? > >>> The trend I see is that you are only correcting bugs when someone >>> points them out to you. >> >> >> Ya, I have better things to do with my time then turn a toy example >> into production quality code, especially when you keep changing the >> parameters by which the code is judged. > > > I have never changed them. > > > > Pascal >