From: Brian Rogoff <bpr@shell5.ba.best.com>
Subject: Re: OO puzzle
Date: 1999/12/29
Date: 1999-12-29T00:00:00+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.9912292100270.8540-100000@shell5.ba.best.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 83sq9g$5ml$1@nnrp1.deja.com
On Thu, 23 Dec 1999, Ehud Lamm wrote:
> This issue of system validity is discussed in the "Eiffel the language"
> book, from which I took the examples. If any one is interested in
> looking it up. This is indeed the heart of this issue.
Just to refresh my memory, do any real Eiffel compilers do system validity
checking, or deal with "polymorphic catcalls" as decribed recently by
Meyer, or do all compilers just punt on this issue?
Even the theoretical checks require global analysis right? This doesn't
sit well with the goal of separate compilation.
Parameter covariance seemed like a huge mistake of the Eiffel design to
me. Is it all fixed and working now?
-- Brian
next prev parent reply other threads:[~1999-12-29 0:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1999-12-22 0:00 OO puzzle Ehud Lamm
1999-12-22 0:00 ` Tucker Taft
1999-12-23 0:00 ` Ehud Lamm
1999-12-23 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1999-12-23 0:00 ` Ehud Lamm
1999-12-24 0:00 ` swhalen
1999-12-25 0:00 ` Ehud Lamm
1999-12-25 0:00 ` Ehud Lamm
1999-12-29 0:00 ` Brian Rogoff [this message]
1999-12-30 0:00 ` Jeffrey L Straszheim
1999-12-31 0:00 ` Brian Rogoff
1999-12-31 0:00 ` Jeffrey L Straszheim
2000-01-02 0:00 ` Brian Rogoff
2000-01-03 0:00 ` Matthew Heaney
1999-12-22 0:00 ` Ted Dennison
1999-12-23 0:00 ` Ehud Lamm
1999-12-23 0:00 ` Robert A Duff
1999-12-25 0:00 ` Ehud Lamm
1999-12-23 0:00 ` Ted Dennison
1999-12-25 0:00 ` Ehud Lamm
1999-12-22 0:00 ` Jeff Carter
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox