1. RE: OOP Features (was euFAQ request for comment)
Wow, yes it's rather impressive.
I had a quick look and am amazed by the functionality and
quality!
Well done Mike,
Ray
!
Ken Rhodes wrote:
> Ray,
>
> Check out Mike Nelson's new OOP Library - Diamond,
> recently posted. It is full featured to say the least.
>
> Ken Rhodes
>
>
> --- Ray Smith <smithr at ix.net.au> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Chris Bensler wrote:
> >
> > > I don't agree that EU lacks OOP. It lacks
> > native OOP support, but
> > > there are quite a few good OOP libraries in the
> > archives. Same for DB
> > > support, but I don't even agree that it should be
> > supported natively.
> > >
> > > I think cdecl_ DLL support should be in there,
> > and COM support.
> >
> > Do any of the OOP libraries support full "OOP"
> > techniques?
> > Namely:
> > * Inheritance,
> > * Polymorphism, and
> > * Constructors and Destructors
> >
> >
> > With the DB comment, I agree they shouldn't be
> > supported natively
> > but I see very little add on support for DB's at
> > all.
> > MySQL, EDS and ODBC are supported ... but there are
> > many more DB's not
> > supported. I can't see DB support being a strength
> > of Euphoria.
> >
> > I'll wait for you and Matthew to finish your
> > discussion on
> > cdecl_ DLL support before adding that to the list.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Ray Smith
> > http://rays-web.com
> >
> >
Ray Smith
http://rays-web.com
2. RE: OOP Features (was euFAQ request for comment)
Correct me if I'm wrong, but from how I understand it, polymophism
basically means that it's possible to call the original member or
method, even if the subclass overrides the particular member or method.
The polymorphism occurs within the member or method routine, and so is
transparent to the user.
This allows you to create a subclass that redefines a member or method,
but can still utilize the original.
Chris
petelomax at blueyonder.co.uk wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Apr 2002 08:26:37 -0700, Mike Nelson
> <MichaelANelson at WORLDNET.ATT.NET> wrote:
>
> <snip>
> >The OOP system resolves this at run time and the programmer who writes
> >the
> >method call needn't know which class X belongs to--the correct method
> >will
> >be called.
>
> A neat shortcut perhaps;
>
> but PERHAPS reverberates round my brain.
>
> The programmer should know EXACTLY which routine is being called,
>
> Just my 0.10c & why I really don't want oop nonsense in std Eu.
>
> Actually, that will sound way too harsh; I've learnt ALOT from oop,
> but personally I don't need it forced down my throat.
>
> Pete
>
>
