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=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: fac41,2c6139ce13be9980
X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public
X-Google-Thread: 103376,3d3f20d31be1c33a
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,2c6139ce13be9980
X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public
X-Google-Thread: f43e6,2c6139ce13be9980
X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public
From: Ken Garlington <kennieg@flash.net>
Subject: Re: Design by Contract
Date: 1997/09/05
Message-ID: <3410CBDA.1CE0@flash.net>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 270132977
References: <33E9ADE9.4709@flash.net> <EEsF5y.F5H@syd.csa.com.au>
 <34023BC4.2781E494@eiffel.com> <3402d123.0@news.uni-ulm.de>
 <3402DA6A.C4444E46@calfp.co.uk> <3402e51d.0@news.uni-ulm.de>
 <3402E8C9.3384D976@calfp.co.uk> <dewar.872631036@merv>
 <34050F3C.5A3A@invest.amp.com.au> <dewar.872791797@merv>
 <5u61qa$e23$6@miranda.gmrc.gecm.com> <dewar.872887402@merv>
 <340CA8E5.2A6A@flash.net> <dewar.873477535@merv>
Organization: Flashnet Communications, http://www.flash.net
Reply-To: Ken.Garlington@computer.org
Newsgroups: comp.object,comp.software-eng,comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.eiffel
Date: 1997-09-05T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Robert Dewar wrote:
> 
> Ken said
> 
> <<I can't speak for those cases, but with PCMS you can distinguish between
> files
> that represent a spec (either Eiffel or Ada) and those that represent a
> body.
> Furthermore, you can define different "life cycles" (who gets to do what
> to each
> file at a given time) for each type of object.
> 
> Personally, given that you can (a) mimic Ada specs in Eiffel with
> deferred classes,
> (b) mimic Eiffel combined specs/bodies in Ada with a decent editor (and,
> in the case
> of GNAT, with gnatchop), and (c) mix and match deferred and concrete
> operations
> in both languages, I don't see a huge difference between the two
> languages in this
> area. Bad CM will defeat either language's approach...>>
> 
> Sure, but that's the whole point, PCMS is file based, and from your
> description will not easily handle a single file that is both the spec
> and body in Ada terms. If you want to think in Ada terms, think how
> you would handle a single file with spec and body in the same file, giving
> different permissions to people to modify the spec part or body part, sounds
> awkward to me using PCMS (or any other CM system I am familiar with).

Understood - however, if I followed the thread correctly, I could in
either
Eiffel or Ada: (a) keep the spec and body separate [works better with
file
oriented CM, etc.] or (b) keep the spec and body together [easier to
code
for simple cases, etc.]. That was _my_ point.