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: 103376,97482af7429a6a62
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: bl884@freenet.HSC.Colorado.EDU (Wes Groleau)
Subject: Re: C++ not OOP? (Was: Language Efficiency
Date: 1995/04/20
Message-ID: <3n5pam$1l8@tali.hsc.colorado.edu>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 101283213
organization: University of Colorado, Health Sciences Center
reply-to: bl884@freenet.HSC.Colorado.EDU (Wes Groleau)
newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1995-04-20T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


In a previous article, ka@socrates.hr.att.com (Kenneth Almquist) says:
>> Generics are not an object oriented feature.  The generally accepted
>> definition of an object oriented programming language is one that
>> supports encapsulation, inheritance and polymorphism.
>
>Generics provide a form of polymorphism.  For example, in Ada you

For that matter, generics provide a form of inheritance (as do derived
types and subtypes).

And a generic (or not) package provides a form of encapsulation.