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: f43e6,2c6139ce13be9980
X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public
X-Google-Thread: 103376,3d3f20d31be1c33a
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Thread: fac41,2c6139ce13be9980
X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public
X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,2c6139ce13be9980
X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public
From: "Michael Gacsaly" <mg@riem.com>
Subject: Re: Separation of IF and Imp: process issue?
Date: 1997/09/15
Message-ID: <5vk4ju$njl$1@jo.randori.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 272747489
Sender: laurel@rmpce9.riem.com
References: <33E9ADE9.4709@flash.net> <EEsF5y.F5H@syd.csa.com.au>
 <34023BC4.2781E494@eiffel.com> <3402d123.0@news.uni-ulm.de>
 <3402DA6A.C4444E46@calfp.co.uk> <340306E1.5FB64D70@XYZZYcalfp.com>
 <5u3dne$c20@gcsin3.geccs.gecm.com> <34057115.D4D7713@stratasys.com>
 <5u4941$9m1@gcsin3.geccs.gecm.com>
X-MimeOle: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE Engine V4.71.1008.3
Organization: RIEM
Newsgroups: comp.object,comp.software-eng,comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.eiffel
Date: 1997-09-15T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


I have been reading this thread for a while, but I don't see how an abstract
Eiffel class creates a CONTROLLED interface.  The implementation class users
would still need to reference the implementation class if they wanted
implementation behavior and the implementation class could have an interface
different from the abstract class, unless the specification of the
implementation class was, itself, controlled.