On 2 November 2016 at 20:36, Henrik Sperre Johansen < henrik.s.johan...@veloxit.no> wrote:
> CodeDmitry wrote > > Why don't Smalltalk or Smalltalklike languages have checked interfaces? > > The compilation occurs at runtime but it is still technically a > > compilation, why don't languages allow implementing interfaces at > runtime? > > The type information is there, and the source can load the list of > > messages expected and check if the compiled class contains all members or > > removes it and throws an exception. Is this just too expensive? > > <rude mode on> because it's smalltalk. and because you don't come into existing temple with own rules </rude mode still on> well.. i hope you will stay here a little bit longer, to learn and undestand, that what you proposing/asking for is ether already there in one or another form, or simply unnecessary. P.S. please forgive me for being rude, impatient and trollish towards newcomers.. but i just can't help with it. -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.
