Re: Good Design Strategies <Was comments on comments>

[billwolf@hubcap.clemson.edu (William Thomas Wolfe,2847,)]

From article <4343@enea.se>, by sommar@enea.se (Erland Sommarskog):
> I don't want to start an Ada vs. Eiffel debate, but the view that
> Eiffel is a flaky language is something Bill Wolfe have to stand for 
> himself.
> 
> What I like to stress is: Ada is *not* an object-oriented language.
> I used to think that, but there are just to much missing. Particulary
> inheritance and dynamic typing. And although this is a trivial fact to
> realise, it still seems necessary that from time to time make a reminder
> about this. Due to Gary Booch and others it is easy for the casual
> reader to get the impression that Ada <=> object-oriented programming.

    I quote from ACM SIGADA Ada Letters, March/April 1989, Volume IX,
    Number 2, Page 10:

      Software Productivity Solutions, Inc., has announced a new product,
      Classic-Ada (tm), which allows Ada software developers to use
      inheritance and dynamic binding in object-oriented Ada designs.
      The product runs on VAX/VMS and Sun/Unix systems.  For more
      information, contact:

         (407) 984-3370       Ms. Lois Valley
                              Vice President, Marketing
                              Software Productivity Solutions, Inc.
                              P.O. Box 361697
                              Melbourne, FL  32936-1697


   I stand by my statement regarding Eiffel's flakiness.  Obviously 
   it's just my opinion, and others may differ, but I think it's a 
   very well-founded opinion.


   Bill Wolfe, wtwolfe@hubcap.clemson.edu