Python from Wise Guy's Viewpoint

[Pascal Costanza]

Remi Vanicat wrote:
> Pascal Costanza <costanza at web.de> writes:
> 
> 
>>Remi Vanicat wrote:
>>
>>>Pascal Costanza <costanza at web.de> writes:
>>
>>>>In a statically typed language, when I write a test case that calls a
>>>>specific method, I need to write at least one class that implements at
>>>>least that method, otherwise the code won't compile.
>>>
>>>Not in ocaml.
>>>ocaml is statically typed.
>>
>>How does ocaml make sure that you don't get a message-not-understood
>>exception at runtime then?
> 
> 
> It make the verification when you call the test. I explain :
> 
> you could define :
> 
> let f x = x #foo
> 
> which is a function taking an object x and calling its method
> foo, even if there is no class having such a method.
> 
> When sometime latter you do a :
> 
> f bar
> 
> then, and only then the compiler verify that the bar object have a foo
> method.

Doesn't this mean that the occurence of such compile-time errors is only 
delayed, in the sense that when the test suite grows the compiler starts 
to issue type errors?

Anyway, that's an interesting case that I haven't known about before. 
Thanks.


Pascal

-- 
Pascal Costanza               University of Bonn
mailto:costanza at web.de        Institute of Computer Science III
http://www.pascalcostanza.de  Römerstr. 164, D-53117 Bonn (Germany)