Christopher Smith wrote:
Yeah. I just missed the part where he specifically identified virtual
functions (which don't exist in Smalltalk-80) as the only acceptable
means of achieving this goal.
Well, C++ and Smalltalk are different languages. One could argue that
*all* "functions" are "virtual" in Smalltalk. Or that since Smalltalk
has no "functions" then it naturally has no "virtual functions". So I'm
not really sure what your parenthetical comment was supposed to imply.
I don't think he argued that "virtual functions" are the only way to do
dynamic dispatch. But it would seem that C++ (as far as I know) only has
two ways of doing dynamic binding: virtual functions and function
pointers, yes? Is there a third way of having a particular call at a
particular line of source code invoke different functions at run time?
If you're going to claim you fell out of your chair because Mr. Brown
didn't think of pointers to functions, I'm going to be rather incredulous.
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
"That's pretty. Where's that?"
"It's the Age of Channelwood."
"We should go there on vacation some time."
--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-lpsg
