home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: news.lmu.edu!aminier@popmail.lmu.edu
- From: Ray Toal <rtoal@eecs.lmu.edu>
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++
- Subject: Re: C/C++ knocks the ....
- Date: 18 Feb 1996 06:38:00 GMT
- Organization: Loyola Marymount University
- Message-ID: <4g6hg8$f4j@ux1.lmu.edu>
- References: <00001a73+00002504@msn.com> <4etcmm$lpd@nova.dimensional.com> <3114d8fb.5a455349@zesi.ruhr.de> <4f5h5t$f13@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu> <4g1bgf$l5@mailhub.scitec.com.au> <3124B43F.19E0@escmail.orl.mmc.com> <4g2r2r$ded@stc06.ctd.ornl.gov> <dewar.824581148@schonberg>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: 157.242.68.31
- Mime-Version: 1.0
- Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
- X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1 (Windows; U; 16bit)
-
- dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) wrote:
- >iMatt says
- >
- > >As for Ada, I'm not yet fully convinced abou the package vs
- > >type thing. C++ might be ugly because you can have all sorts of
- > >elements outside classes, but in Eiffel you cannot.
- >
- > >Eiffel intentionally makes the unit of namespace and of type
- > >the same.
- >
- >Time to make my observation again:
- >
- >unify and confuse mean the same thing (join together)
-
- In this case there are good arguments for the "confuse" part - or,
- at least that identifying a class (a logical construct) with a
- package or module (a physical construct) is less desirable than
- cleanly separating them, like Ada does.
-
- Norman Cohen just posted a really good article on this topic a few
- days ago and I won't repeat it here. It should at least "convince"
- people that separating package and type is a solid design decision
- and not a hack to maintain upward compatibility with Ada 83.
-
- Having programmed in Smalltalk and C++ before Ada 95, I admit I had
- to look twice at the Ada approach because I was so USED TO confusing
- class with module. But taking a few minutes to get used to Ada's
- approach I like it better.
-
- Ray Toal
-
-
-