🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1843@clyde.concordia.ca>, marcap@hercule.cs.concordia.ca
(PAWLOWSKY) comments on a series of postings on the absence of a mechanism
in Eiffel to pass routines as arguments to routines:

> [...]
> I've been waiting for someone from ISE to respond to this, but the line
> seems to have gone dead.  About a year ago (March 19th to be exact),
> Bertrand Meyer posted his solution to this problem [...]

There are two reasons for the recent lack of postings from Interactive
on this topic.

The first reason is precisely last year's message, as recalled
by Mr. Pawlowsky; in that message I trid to address the question as well
as I could, showing that there was no need for passing routines in Eiffel
since other mechanisms were available which were more in line with the
object-oriented method. When the question came up again on the net,
I felt that there was not much to add to that message.

The second reason is simply that none of us here at Interactive has been
able to digest the recent messages on the topic. Five or six articles  
at least, each several hundred lines long, and each well thought-out,
were posted recently. They deserve more than quickly drafted answers,
especially at a time when we are taking a hard look at the language with
the official aim of fixing it for many years. Give us some time.
-- 
-- Bertrand Meyer
bertrand@eiffel.com