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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,73036d0217be91e2
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: mfb@mbunix.mitre.org (Michael F Brenner)
Subject: Re: Inheritance versus Generics
Date: 1997/04/25
Message-ID: <5jql3p$p9p@top.mitre.org>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 237328942
References: <33601924.774@flash.net> <dewar.861973462@merv>
Organization: The MITRE Corporation, Bedford Mass.
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-04-25T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Robert said:
    > The Ada 83 design
    > committee was well aware of the object oriented approach (many of them
    > had been using Simula-67 for over a decade -- it is well to remember
    > that the basic OO idea are ancient). Their experience said that writing
    > large scale programs using the OO approach was ineffective, and they
    > very conciously decided against incorporating such features into Ada 83,
    > deciding that the same basic functionality could be achieved in a 
    > language that concentrated on providing powerful genericty.

May I add that the same functionality would have been achieved had packages 
been either first class (makable into arrays) or second class (passable
as generic parameters) objects.