Re: Ada OOP alternatives?

[Robert A Duff <bobduff@shell01.TheWorld.com>]

"(see below)" <yaldnif.w@blueyonder.co.uk> writes:

> On 17/07/2008 01:05, in article wcc3am9gytt.fsf@shell01.TheWorld.com,
> "Robert A Duff" <bobduff@shell01.TheWorld.com> wrote:
>> I'd still rather eliminate private parts altogether.
>
> How would you do that while allowing ADT clients to access objects directly
> (i.e. not via a pointer a la Java)?

I'd have the compiler take a peek at the body when compiling the client.
After all, that's what Ada compilers already do for pragma Inline.
And I think incremental compilation can be a big win.

In fast-compile mode, I might tolerate the "via pointer" way.
It doesn't need to be a pointer into the heap, as in Java.

We're just talking about the size of the type, really -- you say
"access objects", but clients can't access the record components
of a private type -- all they can do is declare objects and
pass them around.

Java, like many languages, doesn't even _have_ separate specs.
(And it _still_ insists on pointers for almost everything!)
So it's clearly feasible to have information in bodies used
when compiling clients.

- Bob