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: 103376,411186037d1bc912 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: bobduff@world.std.com (Robert A Duff) Subject: Re: Some questions about Ada. Date: 1996/05/03 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 152785037 references: <4xrat20zh0.fsf@leibniz.enst-bretagne.fr> organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1996-05-03T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article <4xrat20zh0.fsf@leibniz.enst-bretagne.fr>, Laurent Guerby wrote: >Robert A Duff writes >: In article , >[deleted] >: Ada/Modula-3 way is better. Some think the C++/Smalltalk way is better. > ^^^^^^^^^ > > Do you mean Eiffel here ? I don't see C++ closer to Smalltalk than >Ada or Modula-3, in fact, Smalltalk is very close to Smalltalk ;-). I meant Smalltalk. Eiffel is in this class, too. I agree that C++ and Smalltalk are quite different animals. However, in the particular respect I was talking about, they are the same: the unit of modularity is the class, and the operations are thought to live inside each object of the class. This leads to the prefix notation that some love and some hate (and some erroneously think constitutes the essence of OOP). > Note that the GNAT style switch works exactly this way (if I >remember well), and consider casing inconsistency as a fatal error. Makes sense. Of course, this will not allow the convention that some people using case-sensitive languages seem to like: animal: Animal; Whereas Ada requires something like: Animal: Animal_Type; or The_Animal: Animal; - Bob