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=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: fac41,2c6139ce13be9980 X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,3d3f20d31be1c33a X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,2c6139ce13be9980 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public X-Google-Thread: f43e6,2c6139ce13be9980 X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public From: kennel@nospam.lyapunov.ucsd.edu (Matt Kennel (Remove 'NOSPAM' to reply)) Subject: Re: Separation of IF and Imp: process issue? Date: 1997/09/10 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 271441547 References: <33E9ADE9.4709@flash.net> <5utag9$o6s@newshub.atmnet.net> <5v1gua$fkk@newshub.atmnet.net> <5v2k2n$1cfu$2@flood.weeg.uiowa.edu> <5v4095$h62@newshub.atmnet.net> Reply-To: kennel@NOSPAMlyapunov.ucsd.edu Organization: University of California at San Diego Newsgroups: comp.object,comp.software-eng,comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.eiffel Date: 1997-09-10T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: : :> Of course, Eiffel then gives you the ability to use abstract classes as :> specs as well, but that's a different discussion. : :No, that's just basically wrong. Abstract classes are like abstract :types in Ada, not specs. Why? Aren't Eiffel classes like abstract types in Ada, *and* specs? What is the problem? The only distinction I see is that Ada requires a separate spec for each concrete class, but Eiffel does not, though it permits abstract classes which would work in the same way. I can hardly see this as an important missing ability of Eiffel. -- * Matthew B. Kennel/Institute for Nonlinear Science, UCSD * * According to California Assembly Bill 3320, it is now a criminal offense * to solicit any goods or services by email to a CA resident without * providing the business's legal name and complete street address. *