Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> Sure. "Don't read documentation" or "forget documentation" is as bad as 
> "don't document it". But if it's a naming convention used throughout the 
> language, people don't do it.

  And if it's a language feature, people don't do it either, not even by
accident.

> >   Why is it a bad thing to make the compiler check interface breaches is
> > beyond my comprehension.

> First, the whole "dynamic languages" bit at the start should indicate not 
> everyone has a compiler for these languages. Secondly, it eliminates a whole 
> raft of useful mechanisms.  Where's the C++ library to which I pass a class 
> and it generates a SOAP interface parser for that class?

  And then you modify your class, and your pre-existing SOAP interface parser
breaks.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message