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-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,604e0f87aa06eab6
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-03-18 02:37:13 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!nycmny1-snh1.gtei.net!nycmny1-snf1.gtei.net!news.gtei.net!colt.net!peernews3.colt.net!news0.de.colt.net!news-fra1.dfn.de!news-koe1.dfn.de!RRZ.Uni-Koeln.DE!uni-duisburg.de!not-for-mail
From: Georg Bauhaus <sb463ba@d2-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 10:37:12 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: GMUGHDU
Message-ID: <b56sso$j5i$1@a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>
References: <mailman.0.1047662587.16695.comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org>
 <1047665830.579605@master.nyc.kbcfp.com>
 <b4vco6$98b$2@a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de>
 <R6Qca.60199$gi1.40659@nwrdny02.gnilink.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: d2-hrz.uni-duisburg.de
X-Trace: a1-hrz.uni-duisburg.de 1047983832 19634 134.91.1.15 (18 Mar 2003
 10:37:12 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@news.uni-duisburg.de
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2003 10:37:12 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: tin/1.5.8-20010221 ("Blue Water") (UNIX) (HP-UX/B.11.00
 (9000/831))
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:35443
Date: 2003-03-18T10:37:12+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Hyman Rosen <hyrosen@mail.com> wrote:
: He's listed as a "member of the expert group". The Java generics
: are particularly bad. While that presentation likes to make the
: usual lies about C++ templates, what they don't tell you is that
: in the Java generics the type parameters can't be fundamental
: types, only Object-derived ones (look at all their examples), and
: that you can't overload on generics:
:     class Joe {
:         void f(List<Integer> l) { }
:         void f(List<Byte> l)    { }
:     }

Yes and no. Perhaps it's the bad habit of many a C++
program to not give names to types, that is use abstraction,
and instead use "in place generics", that leads to this
expectation?
     class LI extends LinkedList<Integer> {}
     class LB extends LinkedList<Byte> {}
     class Joe {
         void f(LI l) { }
         void f(LB l) { }
     }
(Not that easy exposing just the List interface, which I've just learned
is easily accomplished in Eiffel, using a "join feature".)
I'd guess that Betrand Meyer will tell you that OO is in many cases
about *avoiding* overloading.
     class Joe ... {
         void f(List<Integer> l) {}
     }
     class Jane ... {
         void f(List<Byte> l) {}
     }
As for fundamental types, in a true OO language there shouldn't be
non-OO types in the first place, so some true OO-languages
don't have them :-)
I'm not saying that any language should be a true OO-language and
nothing more.