Article View: comp.sw.components
Article #27Re: Inheritance vs. component efficienc
From: Frank Adams
Date: Sat, 17 Jun 1989 08:37
Date: Sat, 17 Jun 1989 08:37
11 lines
1029 bytes
1029 bytes
In article <5750@hubcap.clemson.edu> billwolf%hazel.cs.clemson.edu@hubcap.clemson.edu writes: >From simpson@poseidon.uucp (Scott Simpson): > [A] short little program can be written to ... add a layer of abstraction; > simply have a program ask you for the name of the new data type(s) and > automatically generate a higher-level package which implements itself > through calls to the lower-level packages. This is just inheritance via another name. Isn't it better to have this as a language feature instead of an external hack? Frank Adams adamsf@cs.rpi.edu
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<5533@rpi.edu>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!apple!bionet!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!leah!rpi!brahms.cs.rpi.edu!adamsfReferences:
<5021@wiley.UUCP> <5750@hubcap.clemson.edu>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!apple!bionet!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!leah!rpi!brahms.cs.rpi.edu!adamsf From: adamsf@cs.rpi.edu (Frank Adams) Newsgroups: comp.sw.components Subject: Re: Inheritance vs. component efficienc Message-ID: <5533@rpi.edu> Date: 17 Jun 89 08:37:50 GMT References: <5021@wiley.UUCP> <5750@hubcap.clemson.edu> Sender: usenet@rpi.edu Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY Lines: 11