Thomas Beale wrote:
> Eric Bezault wrote:
> >
>
> >
> > Allowing redefinition of attributes to routines also means that
> > the compiler will have to reject routines inherited from A that
> > use `c' as the target of an assignment, and hence force the user
> > to redefine these routines in B.
> >
> > If ECMA allows this kind of redefinition of attributes to routines,
> > it will have to be very careful and identify all Eiffel constructs
> > where the rules and behaviors are different when the entity is an
> > attribute or a routine, as shown above for assignments.
>
> On the other hand, not allowing it takes away the choice to convert a
> stored representation of something into a computed form, which is one of
> the goals of the rule of uniform access (which is still one of the most
> powerful and under-recognised bits of genius - even if obvious in
> hindsight - in Eiffel).
That's why I was one of the proponent of allowing this kind
of redefinition when it was discussed at ECMA. I just wanted
to point out that we have to be careful if we allow it. It's
not just about relaxing a rule, it has nested implications.
--
Eric Bezault
mailto:
ericb@...
http://www.gobosoft.com------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eiffel_software/<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eiffel_software/join (Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:
eiffel_software-digest@...
mailto:
eiffel_software-fullfeatured@...
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
eiffel_software-unsubscribe@...
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
