RE: Strong Typing, Dynamic Languages, What to do?

["Anton van Straaten" <anton@appsolutions.com>]

Oscar Fuentes wrote:
> The C++ standard does not says that _any_ _pointer_ dereference will
> return a _well_ _constructed_ instance. If you want to stay safe,
> avoid "naked" pointers.
...
> It is not a problem with the _language_.

Your points seem contradictory.  The "problem with the language" in this
example is that the type system fails to detect an out of bounds access to
an array.  The fact that the standard tells you so doesn't fix the problem,
it merely implies that it is up to you to avoid it.