From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.5-pre1 (2020-06-20) on ip-172-31-74-118.ec2.internal X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1 Date: 14 Apr 93 16:58:20 GMT From: pipex!uknet!uknet!mucs!clerew!chl@uunet.uu.net (Charles Lindsey) Subject: Re: Classes vs types; what's the difference? Message-ID: List-Id: In <1993Apr12.152305.10571@seas.gwu.edu> mfeldman@seas.gwu.edu (Michael Feldman ) writes: >In article <1993Apr12.150148.9736@evb.com> jgg@evb.com (John Goodsen) writes: >> >>I still maintain that the "better marketing" argument for using >>"class types" instead of "tagged types" in Ada 9X has been to this >>point unchallenged... >> >I think I'm tending to agree with this (how's that for hedging my bets?). >Nothing would change syntactically by substituting "class" for "tagged". >One new reserved word is required in either case; . Can I remind you that I proposed the reserved word "classified" for this purpose some while back. It has a few, but helpful, advantages. 1) It is an adjective. 2) It implies that the thing is not quite a genuine class, as understood elsewhere, but is clearly related. 3) It carries a feeling that something special has been done to values of that type (such as adding a tag, or 'classification') to them, without actually ramming the idea down your throat as "tagged" does. -- Charles H. Lindsey ------------------------------------------------------------ - At Home, doing my own thing. Internet: chl@clw.cs.man.ac.u k Voice: +44 61 437 4506 Janet: chl@uk.ac.man.cs.cl w Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave., CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K. UUCP: mucs!clerew!chl