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=0.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_DATE,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!ames!think!barmar
From: barmar@think.COM (Barry Margolin)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Procedure types and dynamic binding
Message-ID: <35364@think.UUCP>
Date: 12 Jan 89 06:12:37 GMT
References: <35339@think.UUCP> <4072@hubcap.UUCP>
Sender: news@think.UUCP
Reply-To: barmar@kulla.think.com.UUCP (Barry Margolin)
Organization: Thinking Machines Corporation, Cambridge MA, USA
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <4072@hubcap.UUCP> billwolf@hubcap.clemson.edu writes:
>>From article <35339@think.UUCP>, by barmar@think.COM (Barry Margolin):
>> [Procedural variables] are great for AI applications in which objects 
>> must have highly variable active properties.  
>     Could you expand on these situations?  I'll be happy to support
>     procedural variables if you can describe a general class of applications
>     in which they are intuitively natural and necessary...

Unfortunately, I'm not an AI programmer, so I don't have concrete
examples.  I merely imagined that paradigms such as message-passing
and actors would be implemented using procedure objects.

Barry Margolin
Thinking Machines Corp.

barmar@think.com
{uunet,harvard}!think!barmar