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, LOTS_OF_MONEY autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: fac41,f66d11aeda114c52 X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,f66d11aeda114c52 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: jsa@alexandria.organon.com (Jon S Anthony) Subject: Re: Building blocks (Was: Design By Contract) Date: 1997/09/09 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 271052815 Distribution: world References: <5ulurp$aj8$1@miranda.gmrc.gecm.com> <5un58u$9ih$1@gonzo.sun3.iaf.nl> <5v0bph$n98$2@miranda.gmrc.gecm.com> <01bcbd1d$72196760$108142c1@Yeif-1.eiffel.fi> Organization: PSINet Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.eiffel Date: 1997-09-09T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article <01bcbd1d$72196760$108142c1@Yeif-1.eiffel.fi> "Veli-Pekka Nousiainen" writes: > Unsafe? what is unsafe in Eiffel inheritance? And what is the fix? > I have joined in much too late... > VP The polymorphic "CAT call" stuff, which rests ultimately on covariance which is one of the basic tenets underlying Eiffel's inheritance model. /Jon > Brian Rogoff wrote in article > ... > > > Eiffel's inheritance is based on a theoretical model which later turned > out > > to be unsafe. A (theoretical) fix was proposed, and never implemented. > And > > now we have another theoretical fix. So much for Eiffel theoretical > > models! :-) > > > > -- Brian > > -- Jon Anthony OMI, Belmont, MA 02178, 617.484.3383 "Nightmares - Ha! The way my life's been going lately, Who'd notice?" -- Londo Mollari