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: 109fba,7f8fc37d854731d6 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,7f8fc37d854731d6 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,7f8fc37d854731d6 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public X-Google-Thread: 10461e,7f8fc37d854731d6 X-Google-Attributes: gid10461e,public X-Google-Thread: 114809,7f8fc37d854731d6 X-Google-Attributes: gid114809,public From: jhd@herold.franken.de (Joachim Durchholz) Subject: Re: Interesting but sensitive topic to discuss (HELP: - OOP and CASE t Date: 1996/11/12 Message-ID: <6KkYng6-3RB@herold.franken.de>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 196272501 references: <32813322.41C6@kyebek3.kjist.ac.kr> newsgroups: comp.object,comp.ai,comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.smalltalk Date: 1996-11-12T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: alaric@abwillms.demon.co.uk wrote 12.11.96: > >Could anybody post a short characterisation of prototype languages? > > Basically, instead of creating a class, we instead create a blank > object and insert methods into it. Any object of that 'type' is a kind > of clone of that prototype object. Hum, I think this description applies to class-based languages as well. Just say 'class' instead of 'blank prototype object'. When are the methods inserted - at run-time? Then there's a real difference, but in that case I'm asking myself how they make sure no undefined routine is called. I see serious efficiency problems if these checks are done at run-time. Regards, -Joachim -- Looking for a new job. Resume available on request. WWW version of resume available under http://www.franken.de/users/herold/jhd/resume/index.html