You wrote the example, not me. I'm confused what your argument is. Are you saying that dynamic loaders should check the type of dynamically loaded code agains

You wrote the example, not me. I'm confused what your argument is. Are you saying that dynamic loaders should check the type of dynamically loaded code against the type expected by the code loading it? I agree that's a good idea, but it doesn't require language support for general RTTI, just a type-aware shared-object format and dynamic loader. (Heck, C++ symbol names already incorporate function argument type signatures, so this isn't a huge stretch.) Are you saying that a runtime shouldn't need to trust that dynamically-loaded code actually implements the interface it claims to? If so, that's an incredibly specific requirement that's really better served by sandboxing or an RPC-like interface (especially in C/C++).