Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!apple!bionet!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!leah!rpi!brahms.cs.rpi.edu!adamsf
From: adamsf@cs.rpi.edu (Frank Adams)
Newsgroups: comp.sw.components
Subject: Re: Inheritance vs. component efficienc
Message-ID: <5533@rpi.edu>
Date: 17 Jun 89 08:37:50 GMT
References: <5021@wiley.UUCP> <5750@hubcap.clemson.edu>
Sender: usenet@rpi.edu
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY
Lines: 11

In article <5750@hubcap.clemson.edu> billwolf%hazel.cs.clemson.edu@hubcap.clemson.edu writes:
>From simpson@poseidon.uucp (Scott Simpson):
>   [A] short little program can be written to ... add a layer of abstraction;
>   simply have a program ask you for the name of the new data type(s) and
>   automatically generate a higher-level package which implements itself
>   through calls to the lower-level packages.

This is just inheritance via another name.  Isn't it better to have this as
a language feature instead of an external hack?

Frank Adams	adamsf@cs.rpi.edu