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: fac41,c52c30d32b866eae
X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public
X-Google-Thread: 103376,2ea02452876a15e1
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,c52c30d32b866eae
X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public
From: bobduff@world.std.com (Robert A Duff)
Subject: Re: Real OO
Date: 1996/05/05
Message-ID: <Dqy65J.7A6@world.std.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 153155128
references: <4j9p3a$uo5@watnews1.watson.ibm.com> <DpBsG4.MIE@assip.csasyd.oz>
 <4kbqun$iiv@watnews1.watson.ibm.com> <6850x6pV3RB@herold.franken.de>
organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
newsgroups: comp.lang.eiffel,comp.lang.ada,comp.object
Date: 1996-05-05T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


In article <6850x6pV3RB@herold.franken.de>,
Joachim Durchholz <jhd@herold.franken.de> wrote:
>ncohen@watson.ibm.com wrote 08.04.96 on Re: Real OO:
>> I have nothing against Eiffel, and my background in formal methods makes
>> me especially appreciative of the Eiffel approach to formalizing
>> inheritance, but I find the Ada model of dispatching less error-prone and
>> more flexible.
>
>As I understand it, you mean the multiple dispatching mechanisms  
>(a.k.a. classwide operations).
>[...several reasons why multiple dispatching is evil]

No, Ada does *not* support multiple dispatching.  Class-wide operations
are something different.

- Bob