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: fac41,9a0ff0bffdf63657 X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public X-Google-Thread: f43e6,9a0ff0bffdf63657 X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,4b06f8f15f01a568 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,9a0ff0bffdf63657 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public From: Loryn Jenkins Subject: Re: Which wastes more time? (Was Re: Software landmines (loops)) Date: 1998/09/07 Message-ID: <35F2EA45.B00D926B@s054.aone.net.au>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 388480683 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <6rfra4$rul$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <35DBDD24.D003404D@calfp.co.uk> <6sbuod$fra$1@hirame.wwa.com> <6sebjr$b69$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <6sff74$q0s@gurney.reilly.home> <6sh2j5$jnl$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> <35EC2E5A.16DB6CB1@bigfoot-.com> <6sjc0a$1lk$3@news.indigo.ie> <35EFB09E.15412933@s054.aone.net.au> <35f2bd98.40599408@news.erols.com> <35F06A58.F968BDE1@s054.aone.net.au> <35f48276.90997557@news.erols.com> <35F0C3C9.D1E56FF3@s054.aone.net.au> <6srh67$sj5$1@hirame.wwa.com> <35F1C0B9.8A50CEB0@s054.aone.net.au> <35F23CA9.56F448B6@earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: news.mel.aone.net.au 905112175 4469 203.12.186.79 (6 Sep 1998 20:02:55 GMT) Organization: TekRite Pty Ltd Mime-Version: 1.0 Reply-To: loryn@acm.org NNTP-Posting-Date: 6 Sep 1998 20:02:55 GMT Newsgroups: comp.lang.eiffel,comp.object,comp.software-eng,comp.lang.ada Date: 1998-09-06T20:02:55+00:00 List-Id: Charles Hixson wrote: > > I haven't yet read that far into OOSC, so this is going to be arguing > from a rather abstract understanding, but: > > Does his model of person include a corporation? No, not at all. > I expect that any example given in OOSC will be an extremely simplified > form that doesn't map in any fully formed way onto reality. Because of > this, I don't expect that it is reasonable to expect that the > "PERSON_ROLE" class would be introduced, UNLESS there was some > particular pedagogical point that it was needed to solve. Sure. I take your point, but: Bertrand was criticising someone for showing an incorrectly modelled inheritance relationship. Then he produced something that was dubious at best (it'd work for some contexts). I do know what point he was trying to make: ie distinguish between inheritance and clientship. However, I do feel he could have (should have) a more 'prototypical' example, that was inarguably 'correct'. Loryn Jenkins