What's this got to do with the price of oil in Baghdad?

Post #106,864 by tuberculosis 6/22/03 12:50:49 AM Reply	What's this got to do with the price of oil in Baghdad? I'm an engineer too. And I also sometimes act as an academic (teach CS at undergrad level). The university system has been remade into a set of fancy vocational schools though so lets not try to tell anything by what goes on there. I mean, christ, I just had to explain to Professor Cay Horstman that his most recent [link\|http://www.artima.com/weblogs/viewpost.jsp?thread=4744\|article] was [link\|http://www.artima.com/forums/flat.jsp?forum=106&thread=4744&start=15&msRange=15\|horsepucky]. As to the rest of your post - you're talking about eschewing a state pattern design and preferring switch statements. Fine. This is a 100% language independent decision. What's it got to do with Smalltalk vs Java? Smalltalk has a switch statement (most do - you can write one in a minute of yours doesn't). As for most of the patterns, I've found that a lot of them simply vanish in Smalltalk. It seems that many of them are workarounds for poor language design decisions in Java and C++. "One of the main causes of the fall of the Roman Empire was that, lacking zero, they had no way to indicate successful termination of their C programs." -- Robert Firth
Post #106,878 by warmachine 6/22/03 9:01:00 AM Reply	Oops! You're right. I must have purged switch in Smalltalk from my memory when teaching myself to write in a less procedural fashion. Smalltalk is looking more attractive as a commercial language. Still want strong typechecking, though. Matthew Greet But we must kill them. We must incinerate them. Pig after pig, cow after cow, village after village, army after army. And they call me an assassin. What do you call it when the assassins accuse the assassin? They lie. They lie and we must be merciful to those who lie. - Colonol Kurtz, Apocalypse Now.
Post #106,885 by tuberculosis 6/22/03 1:43:11 PM Reply	You've missed something I think Still want strong typechecking, though. We've already [link\|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=101330\|discussed] this and I think concluded that the benefits of strong type checking are grossly overrated. It seems some of its proponents like Robert C Martin are also coming to this conclusion. "One of the main causes of the fall of the Roman Empire was that, lacking zero, they had no way to indicate successful termination of their C programs." -- Robert Firth
Post #106,889 by JimWeirich 6/22/03 1:58:49 PM Reply	Re: Oops! You're right. Still want strong typechecking, though. I agree, although I'm perfectly happy with dynamic strong types. It doesn't have to be static. -- -- Jim Weirich jweirich@one.net [link\|http://onestepback.org\|http://onestepback.org] --------------------------------------------------------------------- "Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not tried it." -- Donald Knuth (in a memo to Peter van Emde Boas)

Welcome to IWETHEY!