From: nobody@REPLAY.COM (Anonymous)
Subject: Re: Protected vs. unprotected objects
Date: 1997/12/18
Date: 1997-12-18T00:00:00+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <199712181359.OAA22005@basement.replay.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 34984B64.163C@mitre.org
On Wed, 17 Dec 1997 17:00:04 -0500, Terry Devine <tdevine@mitre.org>
wrote:
> I'd like to be able to switch back and forth between protected and
> unprotected objects to be able to experiment with protection at various
> levels of a data structure. However, if I read the LRM correctly, it
> would require major trauma (e.g., object.routine <-> routine(object)) .
> Does anyone have a good solution?
Well, of course. Structure your application in terms of
Abstraction.Operation. "Abstraction" is a package. In the body of the
package, you can implement "Operation" in terms of a protected operation
or not, however you please, without major trauma to the rest of your
system.
This is a software engineering technique called "information hiding."
Jeff Carter PGP:1024/440FBE21
My real e-mail address: ( carter @ innocon . com )
"I waggle my private parts at your aunties."
Monty Python & the Holy Grail
Posted with Spam Hater - see
http://www.compulink.co.uk/~net-services/spam/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~1997-12-18 0:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1997-12-17 0:00 Protected vs. unprotected objects Terry Devine
1997-12-18 0:00 ` Tucker Taft
1997-12-18 0:00 ` Anonymous [this message]
1997-12-19 0:00 ` Mats Weber
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox