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,FREEMAIL_FROM autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: 103376,abfa4f5da664715 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,domainid0,public,usenet X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,CP1252 Path: g2news2.google.com!news4.google.com!feeder.news-service.com!news.motzarella.org!motzarella.org!octagram.motzarella.org!not-for-mail From: Ivan Levashew Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: AuroraUX Combines SunOS with Ada Date: Sat, 04 Apr 2009 15:07:10 +0700 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Message-ID: References: <6af3aae9-5f85-4bdc-82c2-dfad5d4deaed@d2g2000pra.googlegroups.com> <%ndul.56315$4m1.48387@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: news.eternal-september.org U2FsdGVkX18TfdPBYamlJGLL76L8UnRk4LmzmB0qXYp1IfSwPsDTwbxzRqX3w+rWmqw++V36zryBHt0tAZdloFoypkysDzUhokhexaCB9rkX2/fe6wTmknfm/0XtMH8+kCg80WaXi0SBQ1YjS+ZZgw== X-Complaints-To: Please send complaints to abuse@motzarella.org with full headers NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 4 Apr 2009 08:07:18 +0000 (UTC) In-Reply-To: X-Auth-Sender: U2FsdGVkX18S5pC/DQ6m1yfWp4Ffk/+GtN/0ChB12iiFt3/c5WrEhg== X-Image-URL: http://img220.echo.cx/img220/9664/111408397042725603791c71pb.gif Face: iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAADAAAAAwBAMAAAClLOS0AAAAFVBMVEUAAAOZlpMaJz3/9fYs //8FP1E2M3Qbef+MAAACEklEQVQ4jZ2TTW7bMBCFJwO465B2uqZfS+4NnyBA7LXMerSPEPL+R+gb KqmTIAWKDiCCmo9v/kSJqGaVJCp/TLk3kbypSPmdX2QD2YikTUrAe6CqiWuCL/LR3Cfu/AJgbP4K Phtjfz77vwAfOv4XkNPXVSkqwZvmfTZMAriHMOGG1EOt7xw1Rli8hTIkV4DDTIFn6qqYZJ5JFLhT yIVnHAoIrlYTNGKf7yVMUS4yvYITdC8EMaZwHyX4t4ERnCv2uN+HGMFH4x2bHuDEahD1IUR18LAn mC3Jjork3Wny28Gp+h1pMhR08VV9s55hc/J08qrg90RHP15uXag4c1pYMFvVbHmBB3bFtVGBpVwe z+Hno7UyABU8yYEt1l5q+P54Mj8sM5dsVdRqu4RDCLvWGn2lj8pMJdC2BMdtCFG0L8rptiz6Y3s8 Hh1wjehXby133vRneo5hBSgvu+rfozdodnDYui6g7645m1jpVXELFUtnz6yo9MUKfo1YhzXF6WSc bu09Ax7rcGSsgNKezKggaDNGLH8icz80EsmlcwxOPMcBBJZd0VnWzOnSGbYUMEXNnqO00gvB4p1T gG7TUMydxjljz9xxAAyFzUvpfiEZLHD91iwNhVmvfXybYaksDioVlDh4JdqbwVYFyQ2Unq8EeQDr GDfcrS/ZUF8VJAtWUW8pPyFXr8oDMun4r0pHgiVMafoNgUqRDtakwdAAAAAASUVORK5CYII= X-Face: *tpB#/X3&Zh\?<4l;hAgY:m6lt6L]v#Udy\Xwy{@<'qP=9clA}kEbbSV1]B0a^O{|ibsNV~|zu.Da}V4*se@ns!8*Bt$9l-]nbD}o*7ml9J2)u:"!6P%_-`y9,'.L.Psp),njUf!=F5;kx%~\,'D$%{" Cancel-Lock: sha1:jIa90cNpy/3wg+I8NXEduH3j6mw= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X; ru; rv:1.8.1.21) Gecko/20090302 Thunderbird/2.0.0.21 ThunderBrowse/3.2.3 Mnenhy/0.7.6.666 Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:5408 Date: 2009-04-04T15:07:10+07:00 List-Id: Ivan Levashew wrote: > First of all, there is a field for improvements here. Code generators > might create typed views on loosy structures. And the component model is > even wider field for improvements. I don't think that any of the > existing framework is the last word. > > Dmitry Kazakov many times demanded multiple dispatch. AFAIK there is no > component model with MI support yet. > I have just found that: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/System_Object_Model > SOM is also much more robust in terms of fully supporting a wide > variety of OO languages. Whereas basic COM essentially defines a > cut-down version of C++ to program to, SOM supports almost all common > features and even some more esoteric ones. For instance SOM supports > multiple inheritance, metaclasses and dynamic dispatching. Some of > these features are not found in most languages, which had led most > SOM/COM-like systems to be simpler at the cost of supporting fewer > languages. The full flexibility of multi-language support was > important to IBM, however, as they had a major effort underway to > support both Smalltalk (single inheritance, dynamic dispatch) with > C++ (multiple inheritance, fixed dispatch). > > The most notable difference between SOM and COM is support for > inheritance � COM does not have any. It might seem odd that Microsoft > produced an object library system that could not support one of the > most fundamental concepts of OO programming; the main reason for this > is that it is difficult to know where a base class exists in a system > where libraries are loaded in a potentially random order. COM demands > that the programmer specify the exact base class at compile time, > making it impossible to insert other derived classes in the middle > (at least in other COM libraries). Sounds awesome. Really awesome. I have heard that OS/2 was superior but didn't imagine that it was superior to that extent. -- If you want to get to the top, you have to start at the bottom