| Re: Why is polymorphism in PHP not like other languages? Is there a bug in PHP? [message #185102 is a reply to message #185095] |
Wed, 26 February 2014 17:53   |
Daniel Pitts
Messages: 68
Registered: May 2012
Karma:
|
Member |
|
|
On 2/25/14 6:11 PM, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
> On 2/25/2014 6:00 PM, Daniel Pitts wrote:
>> On 2/24/14 9:00 PM, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>>> On 2/24/2014 10:25 PM, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>>>> Robert Heller wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > Note a compiled language (like C++ or Java) need up-front knowledge
>>>> > about
>>>> > things, while *intrepreted* languages defer resolving things until
>>>> > runtime. Partitularly with languages where classes can be defined 'on
>>>> > the
>>>> > fly'.
>>>>
>>>> Note: PHP source code is compiled to bytecode, as is code in many other
>>>> programming languages.
>>>>
>>>> Get rid of the common misconception of “compiled language” vs.
>>>> “interpreted
>>>> language”, and stop spreading this nonsense.
>>>>
>>>> The relevant difference here, if any, is between static and dynamic
>>>> type-checking. (Get rid of “loosely typed” vs. “strictly typed” as
>>>> well.)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> PointedEars
>>>>
>>>
>>> Bytecode is not the same as machine code. And interpreting on the fly
>>> is not the same as compiling once.
>>>
>>> But we also know you don't understand the difference - which is why you
>>> claim they are the same.
>>>
>>> And we also know you're just being your usual pedantic self.
>>
>> This has nothing to do with whether a language is compiled or
>> interpreted, and everything to do with the type semantics of the
>> language.
>>
>> The OP example is along the lines of: Duck Typing.
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_system#Duck_typing
>>
>>
>
> You missed the entire discussion.
Not all of it, though I will admit that I replied why suffering from a
massive migraine, and I might have been hallucinating a bit ;-).
|
|
|
|
Calendar
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
]