From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,953e1a6689d791f6
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Thread: fac41,953e1a6689d791f6
X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public
From: "Marcos F. F. de Macedo" <marcosm@sede.unijui.tche.br>
Subject: Re: Eiffel and Java
Date: 1996/11/07
Message-ID: <32821C82.2D32524D@sede.unijui.tche.br>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 195374799
references: <JSA.96Oct30171528@alexandria> <E06D68.A9r@syd.csa.com.au>
 <JSA.96Nov1172708@alexandria>
content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
organization: NAVOCEANO
mime-version: 1.0
newsgroups: comp.lang.eiffel,comp.lang.ada
x-mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (X11; I; Linux 1.2.13 i586)
Date: 1996-11-07T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Jon S Anthony wrote:

> Right.  As was pointed out back in that old thread, to get at the
> "separate" spec/impl aspects in Eiffel you would use an "abstract
> class" technique.  This doesn't quite work, but it is at least the
> proper analogue.

The spec/impl is to separate the way that clients see the class
(interface) from actual code/structure. This is done in Eiffel by the
short tool. The short tool generates the interface to an eiffel class
with more spec. than is done in Ada.

There is no need to write the interface if it could be stracted from the
source code. I should know that Ada was based on Modula-2 that used this
way of separating. Oberon, the sucessor of Modula-2, uses automatic
interface generating tool.

Marcos Macedo
Brazil