Hi, I don't want you to get the impression that Smalltalkers are unfriendly, but you could at least try to disguise the fact that you are trying to get your homework done for you. :-)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Is smalltalk primarily a functional language, an imperative language, or a > logic-programming language? You can eliminate two of the options quite easily. > Is smalltalk purely object-oriented, not object-oriented, or a hybrid (i.e., > you can do either object-oriented or non-object-oriented programming in this > language)? The answer to this is practically the first sentence of any Smalltalk introduction, and is one of the best things about Smalltalk. > Are data types bound to variables and parameters at compile-time? run-time? a > combination? This is maybe the hardest to answer, but I think you could guess quite easily if you look at how variables and parameters are declared in the source code. This is also one of the best things about Smalltalk. Mike _______________________________________________ help-smalltalk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-smalltalk
