Related articles |
---|
How should size of program grow with size of problem? jvn@fermi.clas.virginia.edu (Julian V. Noble) (1993-10-28) |
Re: How should size of program grow with size of problem? pardo@cs.washington.edu (1993-11-03) |
Re: How should size of program grow with size of problem? henry@zoo.toronto.edu (1993-11-03) |
interface reuse over code reuse sdm7g@elvis.med.virginia.edu (Steven D. Majewski) (1993-11-04) |
reusing ADT, not implementation (was Re: How should size ... ?) jejones@microware.com (1993-11-04) |
Re: interface reuse over code reuse throop@aurw44.aur.alcatel.com (1993-11-05) |
Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |
From: | henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) |
Keywords: | OOP, design |
Organization: | U of Toronto Zoology |
References: | 93-10-136 93-11-025 |
Date: | Wed, 3 Nov 1993 16:58:43 GMT |
pardo@cs.washington.edu (David Keppel) writes:
>>[OOP lets you reuse your code. That's the good part. The bad part is,
>> you reuse your code. ;-)]
>
>From the observation that "optimizations for one case are often
>pessimizations for another," it follows that a "basic problem" with OOP
>and many other reuse models is that they imply a single underlying
>implementation (yes, I know this isn't strictly true...
Indeed, there are a significant number of people who think that once you
strip away the OOH (Object-Oriented Hype), being able to reuse
*interfaces* is much more important than being able to reuse code. If the
interface is held constant, you can build up a library of different
implementations of the underlying abstraction to satisfy different sets of
tradeoffs.
--
Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology, henry@zoo.toronto.edu utzoo!henry
--
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.