Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!cmcl2!rutgers!clyde!wayback!arny
From: arny@wayback.UUCP (Arny B. Engelson)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc,comp.software-eng
Subject: Re: software ICs vs. libraries
Message-ID: <1214@wayback.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 12-Nov-87 12:21:05 EST
Article-I.D.: wayback.1214
Posted: Thu Nov 12 12:21:05 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 15-Nov-87 02:49:55 EST
References: <1716@culdev1.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Whippany, NJ
Lines: 14
Xref: mnetor comp.lang.misc:894 comp.software-eng:72

In article <1716@culdev1.UUCP>, drw@culdev1.UUCP (Dale Worley) writes:
> The other important feature that object-oriented systems need
> (Objective-C has it, I don't know of C++ does) is that one can build
> two objects that present the same external interface, but for which
> the method-routines are different.  I.e., I can have two different
> sorts of "dictionary", implemented differently, and the code that uses
> them can't tell the difference between them.  (This is why you need
> run-time mapping from method-names to routines.)


This concept is also present in Ada.  The implementation of an object
(such as a queue, stack, or anything else) is separated from its external
interface.  Combine this with generics and overloading and you can create
a pretty flexible library of "objects".