Re: OOP language design after Algol 60, was Add nested-function support

Hans-Peter Diettrich <DrDiettrich1@netscape.net>
Sun, 15 Apr 2018 00:23:03 +0200

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
| List of all articles for this month |
From: Hans-Peter Diettrich <DrDiettrich1@netscape.net>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2018 00:23:03 +0200
Organization: Compilers Central
References: <49854345-f940-e82a-5c35-35078c4189d5@gkc.org.uk> 18-03-103 18-03-042 18-03-047 18-03-075 18-03-079 18-03-101 18-04-002 18-04-003 18-04-004 18-04-024 18-04-034 18-04-041 18-04-051 18-04-057 18-04-066
Injection-Info: gal.iecc.com; posting-host="news.iecc.com:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:676f:7373:6970"; logging-data="65324"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@iecc.com"
Keywords: OOP
Posted-Date: 14 Apr 2018 21:02:26 EDT

Am 14.04.2018 um 19:40 schrieb George Neuner:
> On Fri, 13 Apr 2018 10:22:03 +0200, Hans-Peter Diettrich


>> An interface can be implemented by a (class type) component of a class.
>> Then only the specific dependencies between both classes have to be
>> implemented explicitly. In Delphi the "implements" keyword implements
>> such object delegation, in addition to method delegation.
>
> But not all languages are so kind.


A strange argument :-(


If a language can do it without MI, what's the remaining benefit of MI?


DoDi

Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.