Related articles |
---|
Limit of 255 superclasses too low? witness@t-online.de (Uli Kusterer) (2003-11-21) |
Re: Limit of 255 superclasses too low? d699rb302@sneakemail.com (Tim Olson) (2003-12-03) |
Re: Limit of 255 superclasses too low? cfc@shell01.TheWorld.com (Chris F Clark) (2003-12-03) |
Re: Limit of 255 superclasses too low? witness@t-online.de (Uli Kusterer) (2004-02-13) |
Re: Limit of 255 superclasses too low? witness@t-online.de (Uli Kusterer) (2004-02-13) |
Re: Limit of 255 superclasses too low? cfc@shell01.TheWorld.com (Chris F Clark) (2004-02-26) |
From: | Uli Kusterer <witness@t-online.de> |
Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |
Date: | 13 Feb 2004 23:56:12 -0500 |
Organization: | T-Online |
References: | 03-11-075 03-12-019 |
Keywords: | OOP, design, summary |
Posted-Date: | 13 Feb 2004 23:56:12 EST |
Chris F Clark <cfc@shell01.TheWorld.com> wrote:
> Just like Moore's law, the size of the simulated chips doubles with
> great regularity, and at roughly the same speed, so any fixed limit
> (on any attribute of the compiled code) will eventually be exceeded,
> and automated source code writers will then find another limit to
> stretch to cover the boundaries in the problem limit.
Chris,
I must have missed your message. Sorry for the delay in answering...
I guess the general consensus is that 255 classes are enough for 80% of
programs, which is enough for me.
Luckily, my language is basically for beginners, so I doubt they'll
write code like that. If they do, they're probably doing some horrible
design mistake so I guess it's a good idea to give them an error message.
But I guess there would be a way to break any limit. Your program
definitely sounds interesting. What is it used for? You mentioned a
chip, but that's it ?
Thanks,
-- Uli
http://www.zathras.de
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.