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: 103376,4b06f8f15f01a568
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Thread: f43e6,9a0ff0bffdf63657
X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public
X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,9a0ff0bffdf63657
X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public
X-Google-Thread: fac41,9a0ff0bffdf63657
X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public
From: "John G. Volan" <johnvolan@sprintmail.com>
Subject: Re: Module size (was Re: Software landmines)
Date: 1998/09/06
Message-ID: <35F35FBD.680A773D@sprintmail.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 388587334
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <6snlos$bh6$1@hirame.wwa.com> <904912650snz@nezumi.demon.co.uk>
 <35EFFB78.21BBBED6@ksc.nasa.gov> <35F022A5.1D54E53C@ac3i.dseg.ti.com>
 <35F2E492.F38508F4@earthlink.net>
X-Posted-Path-Was: not-for-mail
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-ELN-Date: Sun Sep  6 21:22:51 1998
Organization: EarthLink Network, Inc.
Mime-Version: 1.0
Reply-To: johnvolan@sprintmail.com
Newsgroups: comp.lang.eiffel,comp.object,comp.software-eng,comp.lang.ada
Date: 1998-09-06T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Charles Hixson wrote:
> 
> John G. Volan wrote:
> ...
> > What about abstract methods (C++ pure virtual member functions; Eiffel
> > deferred features)?  Those don't have any "lines of code", if by that
> > you mean executable statements.  But being able to write abstract
> > classes is a crucial part of the O-O method.
>
> Eiffel deferred classes usually have pre- and post-condition (and the
> methods frequently do), and may have invariants, so they aren't really
> equivalent to C++ pure virtual member functions.

Well, only because C++ doesn't include assertions/DBC as part of the
language. Aside from that, Eiffel deferred features and C++ pure virtual
member functions are comparable, because they serve the same purpose.

Anyway, I wouldn't say that Eiffel assertions are "executable
statements", in the traditional sense.  Would an Eiffel SLOC tool count
them as "SLOC"?

-- 
indexing
   description: "Signatures for John G. Volan"
   self_plug: "Ex Ada guru", "Java 1.1 Certified", "Eiffelist wannabe"
   two_cents: "Java would be even cooler with Eiffel's assertions/DBC, %
              %generics, true MI, feature adaptation, uniform access, %
              %selective export, expanded types, etc., etc..."
class JOHN_VOLAN_SIGNATURE inherit SIGNATURE invariant
   disclaimer: not (opinion implies employer.opinion)
end -- class JOHN_VOLAN_SIGNATURE