On 2 November 2016 at 20:36, Henrik Sperre Johansen <henrik.s.johansen@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.