[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [avr-gcc-list] AVR-GCC question

From: Joerg Wunsch
Subject: Re: [avr-gcc-list] AVR-GCC question
Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 07:03:40 +0200 (MET DST)

Matthew MacClary <address@hidden> wrote:

>     I would argue that there is a big difference between 'static
> OOP' and 'dynamic OOP'. It seems like few OO languages allow dynamic
> OO behavior where classes and objects can change at run time, Ruby
> is an example of a language that does do this.

IIRC, that's what the OO freaks would actually call `OO'.  ISTR C++ is
about the sole exception of an `OO language' that allows for early
binding, i.e. isn't necessarily really an OO language.  Anything else
(Python, Java, Ruby, ...) uses late binding, including all its

[Mail-followup-to set]
cheers, J"org               .-.-.   --... ...--   -.. .  DL8DTL

http://www.sax.de/~joerg/                        NIC: JW11-RIPE
Never trust an operating system you don't have sources for. ;-)

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]