Re: Rational for not making cursor tagged in Containers

[Ray Blaak <rAYblaaK@STRIPCAPStelus.net>]

"Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de> writes:
> In a better language any type could be able implement record interface:
> 
>    type Foo is interface record  -- This not an implementation!
>       Mumble : Integer;
>    end record;
> private
>    type Foo is new Float; -- Implements the record interface
>    function "Mumble" (X :  Foo) return Integer; -- Getter
>    procedure "Mumble" (X : in out Foo; Value : Integer); -- Setter

As long as I can use prefix notation then I would be ok with this, e.g given
f:Foo, I can say f.Mumble := 2

Otherwise, ugh.

> 
> X := Y; -- Who owns assignment? 1 or X?

X, of course.

> 
> And, what makes you think that OO defines methods (primitive operations) as
> the behavior? (We can continue this in comp.object if you want.)

I don't know how else to define behaviour except via methods :-).

As to differences in beliefs regarding OO philsophies, I am not going to go
there, except to observer that Ada allows multiple approaches to work.

My point is only that my preferred conceptualizations of OO abstractions leads
me to prefer an obj.member notation, and I choose languages that allow that.

-- 
Cheers,                                        The Rhythm is around me,
                                               The Rhythm has control.
Ray Blaak                                      The Rhythm is inside me,
rAYblaaK@STRIPCAPStelus.net                    The Rhythm has my soul.