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: fac41,2c6139ce13be9980 X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public X-Google-Thread: f43e6,2c6139ce13be9980 X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,2c6139ce13be9980 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,3d3f20d31be1c33a X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: jsa@alexandria.organon.com (Jon S Anthony) Subject: Re: Interface/Implementation (was Re: Design by Contract) Date: 1997/08/30 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 269098183 Distribution: world References: <33E9ADE9.4709@flash.net> Organization: PSINet Newsgroups: comp.object,comp.software-eng,comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.eiffel Date: 1997-08-30T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article doylep@ecf.toronto.edu (Patrick Doyle) writes: > >> >More to the point: not _relevant_ in the Ada case as this is handled > >> >by a different orthogonal capability (instead of conflating it with > >> >module as in Eiffel). > >> > >> I think this is a case of Ada hairsplitting, where something > >> which is really a single concept is split into two "orthogonal" > >> concepts for no particular benefit. Specifying an interface > > > >Irrelevant. Given the case being discussed, the point about > >polymorphism not being available on Ada modules (packages) is just > >plain irrelevant as that is not what they are for. You might as well > >complain about the lack of feathers on mammals for crying out loud. > > Hey, read my quote; I never even *hinted* at polymorphism on > Ada modules. Hey - follow the thread. BM _explicitly stated_ this as a flaw in Ada modules and was the very thing I responded to as irrelevant. > You might as well bash me for complaining about > the lack of feathers on mammals. No, now I'm wondering why you even replied to my first post which was a direct reply to the "polymorphism" aspect as noted above. Sheesh! > >For boatloads of reasons that have been gone over in painstaking > >detail in the past. If you don't like them, use Eiffel or C++ or > >something. If you like the Ada way, use it or CLOS (which treats > >module (actually called "packages" similarly) or some such. > > Hey, Jon, easy boy. I see no "shouting" there. This paragraph should be read as a "*sigh*" and one big shoulder shrug. > Jon, why do you insist on these personal attacks? I thought it I don't see these as "personal attacks". For crying out loud... > bothered, and just want to refer me to Deja News, fine, but > lets keep these shots above the belt. Believe me - there are no shots being fired here. This is another good example how the inexpressive medium of news can set entire threads into flames simply because someone took a simple statement as a "shot". /Jon -- Jon Anthony OMI, Belmont, MA 02178, 617.484.3383 "Nightmares - Ha! The way my life's been going lately, Who'd notice?" -- Londo Mollari