Re: WTF? How can this work?
Re: WTF? How can this work?
- Subject: Re: WTF? How can this work?
- From: Chris Gehlker <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2001 10:07:54 -0700
On 8/20/01 2:20 AM, "Ondra Cada" <email@hidden> wrote:
>
Chris,
>
>
well, it's rather an issue of an opinion, but...
>
>
>>>>>> Chris Gehlker (CG) wrote at Sun, 19 Aug 2001 18:46:00 -0700:
>
CG> >2nd BUT: security: if I am using an immutable class and I make a bug of
>
CG> >using is as if it were a mutable one, I suppose the app would stop and
>
CG> >write a decent info to console!
>
CG>
>
CG> I can't agree here. I don't want ANY error checking overhead on
>
CG> fundamental methods of the fundamental containers. I think it would be
>
CG> much better to provide NSCheckedArray and NSMutableCheckedArray for when
>
CG> this kind of thing is needed.
>
>
...would you like the index-in-bounds check to go from NS(NonChecked)Arrays
>
as well? Etc.
Well yes, actually I would on balance. But it's not the same thing, is it?
What you were asking for was a run time check to see if code violates the
contract implicit it the return type. Said runtime check would merely
backstop a compile time warning that is already provided.
I think there is room for serious people to disagree on the range check
issue. I don't feel the same way about mutable/immutable issue.
Everything doesn't need to be C++ but it doesn't need to be Visual Basic
either.
--
Nature will bear the closest inspection. She invites us to lay our eye
level with her smallest leaf, and take an insect view of its plain. -Henry
David Thoreau, naturalist and author (1817-1862)