Pure dynamic casts?

[Jeremie Pelletier]

language_fan wrote:
> Fri, 25 Sep 2009 00:10:55 +0000, language_fan thusly wrote:
> 
>> You
>> may disagree, but I find it much more pleasant to find that the
>> application does never crash even though it works 15% slower than an
>> optimal C++ code would.
> 
> Imagine if a buggy C++ program was monitoring your health. If it crashed 
> or corrupted data, you would die. Yes, the C++ code would be $1M cheaper 
> to build and the hardware would also be $100K cheaper (overall $10M vs 
> $8.9M), but people would die 95% more often. Or in banking business the 
> systems would handle 4x as much customers and transactions, but 
> unfortunately some transactions would just go to the bit heaven due to 
> the 5-6 reboots the mainframe required daily.

Then that just isn't production ready code, no matter the language. You 
could get the exact same behaviors with even the safest language ever.

A safe language does not prevent logic errors.

Jeremie