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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,91276ec2ea911d3f X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news2.google.com!news4.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!wns14feed!worldnet.att.net!attbi_s72.POSTED!53ab2750!not-for-mail From: "Jeffrey R. Carter" Organization: jrcarter at acm dot org User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.5 (Windows/20060719) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Generic procedures and their parameters References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.201.97.213 X-Complaints-To: abuse@mchsi.com X-Trace: attbi_s72 1157917417 12.201.97.213 (Sun, 10 Sep 2006 19:43:37 GMT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2006 19:43:37 GMT Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2006 19:43:37 GMT Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:6543 Date: 2006-09-10T19:43:37+00:00 List-Id: Robert A Duff wrote: > > I'll quibble with the Ada 83 part. Part of OOP is the "open-closed > principle", which means you can change/extend behavior of something > without modifying its source code. That really requires dispatching, or > something very much like it, and Ada 83 doesn't have any form of > indirect call with which to similate that. Asssembly languages do, > though. OOP is not OO. OOP is a misnomer for programming by extension, which does not necessarily have anything to do with OO. -- Jeff Carter "Sons of a silly person." Monty Python & the Holy Grail 02