Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!rutgers!lll-lcc!pyramid!oliveb!felix!preston
From: preston@felix.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc
Subject: Re: Mixed type collections, and Smalltalk
Message-ID: <2293@felix.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 17-Feb-87 22:12:44 EST
Article-I.D.: felix.2293
Posted: Tue Feb 17 22:12:44 1987
Date-Received: Thu, 19-Feb-87 19:20:34 EST
References: <4000001@nucsrl.UUCP> <3288@milano.UUCP>
Sender: root@felix.UUCP
Reply-To: preston@felix.UUCP (Preston L. Bannister)
Organization: FileNet Corp., Costa Mesa, CA
Lines: 21

To type or not to type... (sorry) :-)


It would seem that what we want is a different notion of 'type'.

When you say that 'my set of XXX routines will handle any class of
objects as long as they respond YYY and ZZZ methods' then you have
given a specification of a (more abstract) type.

This is perhaps a 'type specification' that can match any number of
actual types (or classes).

(For some reason is sounds an awful lot like something I've read
elsewhere...)

========================================
Preston L. Bannister
USENET	   :	ucbvax!trwrb!felix!preston
BIX	   :	plb
CompuServe :	71350,3505
GEnie      :	p.bannister