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=0.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC,SUBJ_ALL_CAPS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 1014db,4873305131bf4d94 X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public X-Google-Thread: fdb77,4873305131bf4d94 X-Google-Attributes: gidfdb77,public X-Google-Thread: 109fba,4873305131bf4d94 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,4873305131bf4d94 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: kennel@nospam.lyapunov.ucsd.edu (Matt Kennel (Remove 'NOSPAM' to reply)) Subject: Re: ADA SUCKS, C/C++/JAVA RULES!!!! Date: 1997/11/11 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 288476259 References: <34557f2b.1934172@news.mindspring.com> <36984222@NEWS.SAIC.COM> <345A83CA.CD776C91@flash.net> <63fl3r$d5c$1@news.luth.se> <345B7A48.F32E4924@flash.net> <63usl7$hqo$7@route1.mdrf.france3.fr> <647jig$igl17@beaker.nit.gwu.edu> Organization: University of California at San Diego Reply-To: kennel@NOSPAMlyapunov.ucsd.edu Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.java.advocacy Date: 1997-11-11T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: On 10 Nov 1997 19:05:30 -0500, Jon S Anthony wrote: :ckann@seas.gwu.edu (Charles W. Kann) writes: : :> because Ada made the decision that there is never a reason to use :> multiple inheritence, : :Actually, all that was decided was there was no reasonably agreed upon :definition of how MI works in all the various OOLs that have it. :This :led to a decision to provide building blocks to allow the programmer :to build whatever version he thought was "correct". But that's yet another definition of how "MI works". Did the Ada designers shy away from choosing one particular module scheme because "there was no reasonably agreed upon definition of how modules ought to work"? Ditto for exceptions. Ans: no. :> I have never been able to figure out a way to write general purpose :> programs which use an interface like construct. : :Such as? By far the most common use of MI is as a kludge to implement :mixin behavior. You get this cleanly and simply in Ada95 with SI and :generic mixins. Explain the kludginess of of "mixins" done, say with Sather or Eiffel. (what's a generic mixin?) I think it's perfectly OK to admit most of the truth that there was no clean way to do MI in a language which included most of Ada83 and its module system as an intellectual base. -- * 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. *