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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,56131a5c3acc678e
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-12-07 09:44:07 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news2.google.com!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newshosting.com!news-xfer2.atl.newshosting.com!216.166.71.118.MISMATCH!small1.nntp.aus1.giganews.com!border1.nntp.aus1.giganews.com!intern1.nntp.aus1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!nntp.rapidnet.com!news.rapidnet.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 07 Dec 2003 11:44:04 -0600
Date: Sun, 07 Dec 2003 11:39:04 -0600
From: Chad Bremmon <bremmon@acm.org>
Reply-To: bremmon@acm.org
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US;
 rv:1.4) Gecko/20030624 Netscape/7.1 (ax)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Question about OO programming in Ada
References: <bq092s$9ph$1@online.de> <cMGdnQaqSutsF0yiRTvUqQ@rapidnet.com>
 <lZsAb.266$iy6.136@nwrdny03.gnilink.net>
 <5JmdnUF_9o_ABE-iRTvUrg@rapidnet.com>
 <l0BAb.601$kz2.183@nwrdny01.gnilink.net>
In-Reply-To: <l0BAb.601$kz2.183@nwrdny01.gnilink.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <n4-dnZh3Sbx4-06iRTvUqQ@rapidnet.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.13.119.65
X-Trace: 
 sv3-AlaUs4yoobrRslPNLvhN3Y1V8eOkRNfhbmnN0HeCOCC2X5Fq7bc2r/DeVsS/PJngX7SKSwU6ro6BykY!fbouO8i/J1BQEPs+fpwkhQoXNmRh52YBKzS7JFl9mXaIBmtzF43PgjLGtsHcoJcqEsXucDB7BJ0w
X-Complaints-To: abuse@rapidnet.com
X-DMCA-Complaints-To: abuse@rapidnet.com
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint
 properly
X-Postfilter: 1.1
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:3204
Date: 2003-12-07T11:39:04-06:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Nobody complained when I write this article...disagreeing with an 
article that complained there was too much Overhead in OO in General.

http://www.embedded.com/2000/0010/0010feat2.htm

He was improperly using OO.  There are times when you only want to use a 
"part" of what Object oriented is.

http://www.embedded.com/1999/9908/9908feat1.htm

If you are using a class for encapsulation with C++, the following must 
happen.

1.  For every method call on the class, there is a pointer passed. We 
must explicitly do this in Ada95 (Usually "This" Parameter)if we want 
Object Oriented Programming.

Thanks,
Chad

Hyman Rosen wrote:
> Chad Bremmon wrote:
> 
>> I understand that.  My point is that if you only want encapsulation, 
>> you have to use a class in C++...with all of the overhead.  In ada, 
>> you just use a private type.  You don't even need it to be tagged.
> 
> 
> I don't think you do understand. For one, there is no "overhead" whatsoever
> in using a class for encapsulation. And in C++ a type may be the equivalent
> of tagged or not tagged, as you choose.
>