The implementation of the derived class will be invoked instead of that of the super class.

Is it always this way around, or are there programming languages in existence that actually will call the method of the super class? --Abdull (talk) 16:40, 8 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe this page should also mention dynamic binding from a pure variable perspective (since the page makes it seem as if binding is an OO term alone). Emacs' Lisp variant (called elisp) is a language that still uses dynamic binding (since some of the early lisp variants did this as well). Other languages also exist no doubt, that uses this type of binding, though it is rare. SvendTofte (talk) 22:39, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please read Talk:Dynamic dispatch and help us describe the differences between dynamic binding and dynamic dispatch (if any exists). --Antonielly (talk) 09:46, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merged and redirected, but please see Late binding. Sigh... 220.100.23.139 (talk) 23:36, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've reverted three consecutive edits by 202.54.173.130 (all of those edits appear to be vandalism or self-reverts), namely this (stolen from here; the copyright isn't GFDL-friendly), this (stolen from here; copy-unfriendly), and this (stolen from here, completely irrelevant). ⇌Elektron 14:38, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A disambiguation must be created. Dynamic binding has a meaning also in chemistry: see dynamic binding (chemistry). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.100.108.56 (talk)

Please do not move or rename a page by copying/pasting its content, as this does not preserve the edit history. See Help:Merging and moving pages. — Tobias Bergemann (talk) 14:33, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The content of this page is wrong; the content discussing dynamic dispatch is actually discussing polymorphism in object-oriented programming. True dynamic binding is implemented in languages that don't use vtables to choose the run-time function to be called, but rather determine the function being called based on the call site and contents at run-time.

If there are no objections, I will update this content in the next few days. Robert Paveza (talk) 05:37, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you 100%. Especially now that Late Binding redirects to this page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonathan Allen

Robert, did you never perform your changes, or were they reverted? The page still seems to be about what's known in the C++ community as run-time polymorphism. JöG (talk) 07:19, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]