Comments on: Function Calling vs Message Sending http://www.blackbagops.net/2006/08/24/function-calling-vs-message-sending/ Weapons and Intelligence in the War Against "Them" Fri, 22 Dec 2006 11:38:23 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Black Bag Operations Network » Blog Archive » Closures for Java? http://www.blackbagops.net/2006/08/24/function-calling-vs-message-sending/comment-page-1/#comment-285 Black Bag Operations Network » Blog Archive » Closures for Java? Wed, 13 Sep 2006 01:08:25 +0000 http://www.blackbagops.net/?p=70#comment-285 [...] Black Bag Operations Network Weapons and Intelligence in the War Against “Them” « Function Calling vs Message Sending BadPage.info moved to BadPage.net » [...] [...] Black Bag Operations Network Weapons and Intelligence in the War Against “Them” « Function Calling vs Message Sending BadPage.info moved to BadPage.net » [...]

]]> By: todd http://www.blackbagops.net/2006/08/24/function-calling-vs-message-sending/comment-page-1/#comment-203 todd Mon, 28 Aug 2006 22:08:13 +0000 http://www.blackbagops.net/?p=70#comment-203 >Actually, it’s not even compileable, because the compiler can prove that a B cannot be an A. You've missed the point of the example I think. In this case, yes the compiler can tell - but separate the initialization (in a function returning Object for instance) and the point is, the compiler will happily build the program because myB *could* be an A. >Actually, it’s not even compileable, because the compiler can prove that a B cannot be an A.

You’ve missed the point of the example I think.

In this case, yes the compiler can tell – but separate the initialization (in a function returning Object for instance) and the point is, the compiler will happily build the program because myB *could* be an A.

]]> By: Cameron Purdy http://www.blackbagops.net/2006/08/24/function-calling-vs-message-sending/comment-page-1/#comment-201 Cameron Purdy Mon, 28 Aug 2006 02:37:22 +0000 http://www.blackbagops.net/?p=70#comment-201 > ((A)myB).doAThing(); // error - object is not an A! Actually, it's not even compileable, because the compiler can prove that a B cannot be an A. > ((A)myB).doAThing(); // error – object is not an A!

Actually, it’s not even compileable, because the compiler can prove that a B cannot be an A.

]]> By: Leandro http://www.blackbagops.net/2006/08/24/function-calling-vs-message-sending/comment-page-1/#comment-197 Leandro Sat, 26 Aug 2006 23:22:52 +0000 http://www.blackbagops.net/?p=70#comment-197 "This is a huge step up from the C++ behavior of crashing" This is wrong. C++ has dynamic_cast, which will throw an exception (for references) or return NULL (for pointers) if the object can't be cast to the provided type. Java's "huge step" isn't that huge afterall. “This is a huge step up from the C++ behavior of crashing”
This is wrong. C++ has dynamic_cast, which will throw an exception (for references) or return NULL (for pointers) if the object can’t be cast to the provided type. Java’s “huge step” isn’t that huge afterall.

]]>