HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mlanett@void.ncsa.uiuc.edu (Mark Lanett)
Subject: Re: Can C++ / X empower us to make great apps for the 90's?
Keywords: nn
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 1992 02:15:08 GMT

linton@marktwain.rad.sgi.com (Mark Linton) writes:

>I agree that interface builders are a good thing and the Next one
>is quite nice.  I believe that dynamic loading is the important feature
>missing from most C++ environments; I'm less convinced that
>I need to be able to get "method not defined for this object" errors.

A friend bought a NeXT (he's an experiences MacApp/C++ developer) and has not
been terribly impressed with NextStep. One of his biggest complaints is that
he *isn't* getting "method not defined for this object". Next has their
doesNotUnderstand message just swallow everything and not provide any error
messages at all! The only way he's figured out to tell if a message is actually
received and understood by the correct object is to step into every method
dispatch. To top it off, which Obj-C allows typed objects, the Next IB cannot
parse them; it requires everything to be 'id'. So even if he wants to type 
things to reduce a really ridiculous number of runtime errors... he can't.
Maybe 3.0 will be better.
-- 
Mark Lanett, Software Tools Group, NCSA           mlanett@uiuc.edu or  NCSA.STG
"People wander in and out of virtual rooms in virtual settings with virtual
characters and virtual money and virtual armor and virtual weapons, which is
virtually a good way to spend time, but not quite." -- Usenet Oracle
-- 
Mark Lanett, Software Tools Group, NCSA           mlanett@uiuc.edu or  NCSA.STG
"People wander in and out of virtual rooms in virtual settings with virtual
characters and virtual money and virtual armor and virtual weapons, which is
virtually a good way to spend time, but not quite." -- Usenet Oracle
From: doug@nmri.ge.com (Doug Becker)
Newsgroups: comp.object
Subject: Refs. for OOD using C
Date: 14 Apr 92 22:30:23 GMT

I'm looking for some good references regarding the application of OOD
using the C language.  For example, I've heard that cfront is a good
example of this -- are there any sources of info for the
implementation?  Ideally, I'd be interested in something like section
7.3.6 of Coad and Yourdon's _Object_Oriented_Design_, but with a bit
more meat (and some real-world examples).

Please respond directly to me -- I have no way to read this newsgroup.
(I'll be more than happy to summarize if needed.)

-- 
Doug Becker             doug@nmri.ge.com             crdgw1!sane!doug
Xref: sparky comp.object:1711 comp.software-eng:1763 comp.lang.c++:6617 comp.lang.objective-c:249
From: berger@sfc.sony.com (Bob Berger)
Subject: Re: Can C++ / X empower us to make great apps for the 90's?
Keywords: nnn
Organization: SONY Advanced Video Technology Center San Jose, CA USA
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 20:43:32 GMT

In article <jctic0k@fido.asd.sgi.com> linton@marktwain.rad.sgi.com (Mark Linton) writes:
>In article <1992Apr8.060832.9260@sfc.sony.com>, berger@sfc.sony.com (Bob Berger) writes:
>|> I want to treat my GUI objects (widgets, structured graphics, etc) as
>|> first class objects. I want to create modified versions of existing
>|> widgets through OO techniquies like inheretance using the OO language
>|> mechanisms, not kludge toolkit mechanisms.
>
>I don't understand what you are referring to as a "kludge".

I was not referring to InterViews which is a true OO package ontop of Xlib, 
but to the various wrapper packages around Motif that just offer enough glue
to allow a C++ program to call Motif, but not enough to make the GUI widgets
into first class objects.

-- 
Bob Berger  -  SONY Advanced Video Technology Center
685 River Oaks Parkway  San Jose, CA 95134 408-944-4964 FAX:  408-954-1027  
INTERNET: berger@sfc.sony.com   UUCP: [uunet,mips]!sonyusa!sfcsun!berger
Newsgroups: comp.object
From: donovan@roche.csl.sri.com (Donovan Hsieh)
Newsgroups: comp.object
Subject: Reusable generic class libraries
Date: 13 Apr 92 20:19:30 GMT
Article-I.D.: csl.1992Apr13.201930.5264
Reply-To: donovan@roche.csl.sri.com (Donovan Hsieh)
Organization: SRI International, Computer Science Lab, Menlo Park, CA

We are about to start an OO project. One of the first task is to
identify a competent
reusable and generic class inheritance library that can be used in the
project. We have
looked at the NIH class library and would like to evaluate serveral
others for comparison
purposes. I appreciate your input if you have expereinece with any
commercial off-the-shelf
or research prototype class libraries.  We are looking for the following info :

   (a) OOPL supported, e.g., C++, Smalltalk, ..
   (b) Basic object types, e.g., bags, linked lists, stacks, ...
   (c) Advanced data structures, e.g., B-tree, hashing, ...
   (d) Genericity and reusability
   (e) Robustness and extensibility
   (f) Stability and reliability
   (g) Does it support persistency?
   (h) Original developers, institutions, or companies
   (i) Contact info.

I will try to summarize the result if I should receive enough input. For
those who send 
their calss library info to me through email, in return I will
send back a copy of my recently published SRI technical report titled 

"Survey of Object-oriented Analysis/Design Methodologies and Future CASE
Framework"

in which a rather comprehesive comparative analysis is performed on the
following
four different OO methodologies:

  . Rumbaugh
  . Booch
  . Coad & Yourdon
  . Shlaer & Miller

and two most popular CASE frameworks:

  . IBM AD/Cycle
  . ECMA/PCTE



Donovan Hsieh

Computer Science Laboratory
SRI International
333 ravenswood Ave.
Menlo Park, CA94025
Newsgroups: comp.object
From: hasko@heeg.de (Hasko Heinecke)
Newsgroups: comp.object
Subject: Re: SUMMARY: Object-Oriented Software Maintenance (1200 lines)
Date: 15 Apr 92 15:16:30 GMT
Organization: Georg Heeg Objektorientierte Systeme, Dortmund, FRG

In article <xjwjzfq.objsys@netcom.com> objsys@netcom.com (Bob Hathaway) writes:
>  Also, Smalltalk object declarations do not specify type or class, one
>  must look at the initialization of an object to determine its type and
>  parameters give no clue except for comments and the semantic content of
>  their name.  Hence a quick look shows all objects to be the same as the
>  epitomal void* type in C++ and objects can even change their class with
>  the "become" Object method.  So this leaves Smalltalk as dynamically
>  typed, but in the most unrestricted way because there are no type
>  declarations at all!  This should not be confused with "typeless" as

You should look at the objects class, do this by asking the object. Objects are
NOT data. Object just know what class they belong to. Nothing about
initalization/declaration. I think, you confuse the terms "parameter" and
"object". Objects are, well, things that have certain information that is
comparable with data in non-OO languages. You can just ask them about it.
Parameters are simply a concept for communication between objects. Thid
communication is not restricted to certain classes (communication is "untyped")
whereas objects have a class, which is well defined at all times.

I think, the whole discussion about typing exists because people tend to say
"Hey objects are data and methods are procedures" which is entirely wrong.
Objects are entities that communicate vie messages whose contents is not
restricted to certain things that you don't really have in Smalltalk. It's
just that you can throw anythig at anybody, but his reaction will differ
depending on if it was a dollar bill or a rock. Maybe, you'll get some kind
of error notifier, but still you can do it - you are not restricted. The
parameter "thrownObject" is not typed.

IMHO, typeless, strongly, weakly, dynamically or statically typed are not
applicable at least to Smalltalk - or even to any OOL.

Hasko

-- 
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| hasko@heeg.de  --  Hasko Heinecke @ Georg Heeg Objektorientierte Systeme |
| "Computers are different from telephones - computers do not ring." --AST |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: comp.object
From: "Bob Hathaway" <objsys@netcom.com>
Subject: Re: SUMMARY: Object-Oriented Software Maintenance (1200 lines)
Date: Tue, 07 Apr 92 04:46:14 GMT
Organization: Object Systems

>In article <BEVAN.92Apr3165546@panda.cs.man.ac.uk> bevan@cs.man.ac.uk (Stephen J Bevan) writes:
>>In article <3rkjx-q.objsys@netcom.com> objsys@netcom.com (Bob Hathaway) writes:
>>   Smalltalk is an extreme example the other way with no static typing
>>   (hence a typeless language) 
>>
>>Lumping "dynamic typing" in with "weak typing"/"typless" means you

Opps, I just noticed you were confusing 'weak typing' with 'typeless'.
Like it or not, the literature refers to purely dynamically typed languages
(such as Smalltalk) as typeless and refers to 'weak typing' as holes in the
compilers typechecker which can allow type insecurities to pass by (even
without warning), as in C.

bob
objsys@netcom.com
From: bharat@ccvax.ucd.ie
Newsgroups: comp.object
Subject: help required
Date: 7 Apr 92 18:58:08 GMT
Organization: University College Dublin

hi,
computer wizards,
i am doing my research in network management in heterogeneous environment. It's
an ood based system and will be implemented in C++. Could anyone give some idea 
on following:
(i)HOW DO I DEFINE OBJECT CLASSES:I have read couple of standards (i.e.CMIS/P, 
etc.). DIS-ISO/IEC 10040-Information processing sys.- OSI- System management
overview, says that "managed objects can be specific to an individual layer, in
which case they are known as (N)-layer managed objects.Those managed objects 
that are relevant to more than one layer, to a specific system management 
function (management support object) or to the system as a whole are known as 
system managed objects." (from sec. 5.2.1.).Does this mean that we can define
each layer as a class (say, physical layer as a class and modem,MUX, as 
instances of the class "physical layer", and so on?

(ii)HIERARCHY AND INTERELATION OF OBJECT CLASSES AND OBJECTS:In the context of
network management how would i define the hierarchy and interrelationship 
between network resources (i.e. modem, PBX, bridge, router, gateway, 
workstation etc.)

All rel. informations are welcome.

Thanks in advance.
(please send info. on e-mail, if possible).

- Bharat
Comp. Sc. Dept., U.C.D.,Belfield, Dublin-4
IRELAND.
e-mail - bharat@ccvax.ucd.ie
From: inunn@hpb.hwc.ca
Newsgroups: comp.object
Subject: Re: O-O adoption, rejection
Date: 6 Apr 92 15:08:55 EDT
Organization: Health and Welfare, Canada

I recall hearing that Cognos Inc. in Ottawa, Canada had a large OO develop-
ment project which they had to scrap.  Confirmation and reasons for should
be sought after before using this information.

Ian Nunn
From: sam@staypuffed (Sam Griffith)
Newsgroups: comp.object
Subject: C++ binding vs. Obj-C binding
Keywords: C++, Obj-C, OOP
Date: 9 Apr 92 23:02:43 GMT
Reply-To: sam@pencom.com
Organization: Pencom Software

In his posting, Eric Smith askes about a previous posting concerning C++ and X  
windows:

>In article <1992Apr8.060832.9260@sfc.sony.com> berger@sfc.sony.com (Bob  
>Berger) writes:
>>The dynamic-binding of the Objective C extensions to the NeXTstep C++
>>compiler seem to be a key to allowing for the easy sharing, reuse and
>>incremental development process. The fact that the NeXTstep compiler
>>(and gcc-2.x) allows for the mixing of Objective C and C++ (and of
>>course C) in one program now allows the PROGRAMMER (as opposed to the
>>language designer!) to choose the level of binding (static or dynamic)
>>as appropriate for the application.
>
>What do you mean?  C++ has always had dynamic binding.  It's the single
>most important feature of the language.


I think what he is alluding to is that the dynamic binding in C++ is somewhat  
limited.  For example, in C++, you can't dynamically load a class into the  
class hierarchy at runtime, which is how IB loads in new interface objects.

In C++ you can't do that without screwing with the v-tables -- this is not  
recommended, even though it is described in the book "Advanced C++".

These differences are all related to the fact that C++ tries to do most of it's  
binding at compile time, whereas Obj-C does almost everything at runtime.  It  
would be very easy to get into a very long discussion of the merits of both  
approaches, but I'll just say that the C++ method is more aimed at giving you  
execution speed and somewhat less flexability, whereas the Obj-C method is  
aimed at more flexibility and somewhat lower execution speed.


--
Sam Griffith Jr.
Pencom Software
sam@pencom.com
From: objsys@netcom.com (Bob Hathaway)
Newsgroups: comp.object
Subject: Re: SUMMARY: Object-Oriented Software Maintenance (1200 lines)
Date: 7 Apr 92 04:49:57 GMT
Organization: Object Systems

In article <9qpjhng.objsys@netcom.com> "Bob Hathaway" <objsys@netcom.com> writes:
>Like it or not, the literature refers to purely dynamically typed languages
>(such as Smalltalk) as typeless and refers to 'weak typing' as holes in the
>compilers typechecker which can allow type insecurities to pass by (even
>without warning), as in C.
                   -------  Without Lint.

bob
objsys@netcom.com

P.S.  My apologies to the net accountants.
From: bonnett@seismo.CSS.GOV (H. David Bonnett)
Newsgroups: comp.object
Subject: Definition for Multiple Reuse?
Date: 10 Apr 92 20:22:18 GMT
Article-I.D.: seismo.50636
Organization: Center for Seismic Studies, Arlington, VA


Can anyone provide me with a concise definition for the term
"Multiple Reuse", or with a pointer to a published definition
thereof? I dug through CACM and Software Engineering & Practice
(I think) etc without luck.  

Thanks in advance,

-dave bonnett-   Center for Seismic Studies;  Arlington, VA 
      bonnett@seismo.css.gov :  (703) 276-7900 
	Pop Kid Internationale
 
Newsgroups: comp.object
From: johnr@ee.uts.edu.au (John Reekie)
Subject: Re: C++ binding vs. Obj-C binding
Organization: University of Technology, Sydney, Australia
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 15:42:45 GMT
Keywords: C++, Obj-C, OOP

objsys@netcom.com (Bob Hathaway) writes:

>Good analysis.  I'd just like to point out that there is a middle ground,
>where all the static typing of C++ (including virtuals) is available
>and where dynamic typing is available if necessary, but without any real
>cost to the static facilities.  I believe this is the right way to go,
>supporting the best of both instead of forcing users to choose between
>fast enough vs. powerful enough, which is a choice I've never considered
>acceptable.  *PLUG*  I've designed and am now implementing such a scheme
>(now implemented in a superset of C++, it also supports the dynamic classes
>mentioned above plus much more) and hope it will be out by next year.  I
>call it "Direct Compilation". *END PLUG*

Makes sense to me. Don't we really want a language with fully
dynamic typing, but with c ompiler smart enough to figure out
when to use static binding. The programmer gets a consistent
semantics to work with, _and_ efficiency when possible.

Isn't this the approach taken with SELF (they have an update
in every OOPSLA, it seems)?

John Reekie
Newsgroups: comp.object
From: Bob Hathaway <objsys@netcom.com>
Subject: Re: SUMMARY: Object-Oriented Software Maintenance (1200 lines)
Date: Sun, 12 Apr 92 22:20:38 GMT
Organization: Object Systems

In article <BEVAN.92Apr8102029@panda.cs.man.ac.uk> bevan@cs.man.ac.uk (Stephen J Bevan) writes:
>In article <sqpjtsf.objsys@netcom.com> objsys@netcom.com (Bob Hathaway) writes:
>   In article <BEVAN.92Apr3165546@panda.cs.man.ac.uk> bevan@cs.man.ac.uk (Stephen J Bevan) writes:
>   >In article <3rkjx-q.objsys@netcom.com> objsys@netcom.com (Bob Hathaway) writes:
>   >
>   >   ML is statically typed, so if I'm not mistaken, kiss
>   >   separate compilation goodby, they check everything.
>   >
>   >Why should static typing mean you can't have separate compilation?
>
>   Since ML supports polymorphism and claims to be statically typed
>   and since the versions of ML I used were interpreted (nothing
>   separate), I assumed all code would be available allowing all
>   functions to be checked with calls to insure type correctness.
>
>I suggest you try a more recent ML system, e.g. New Jersey ML
>Most (all?) allow separate compilation as you can find in say C++, Ada
>... etc.

Great.  Do you know the implementation mechanism used to support
polymorphism?  I won't have the chance to look into it, but if I come
across some impl. literature, I'll post a summary/comparison/contrast of
the approaches and power provided by polymorphism in both functional and
object-oriented languages (any knowledgeable comments are welcome).

>
>
>   Does ML and/or Haskell place restrictions on polymorphic parameters,
>
>Not in the sense of restricting the values to certain simple types,
>no.
>
>
>   Without separate compilation, I'm not sure if any dynamics [dynamic
>   binding] are required at all. 
>
>I hope I didn't cut away too much context here, as I read the above as
>"dynamic binding isn't necessary if you compile all the files together
>in one go".  Now I realise that you can compile away _some_ dynamic
>calls if enough context information is available, but all?

For polymorphism without tricks, I don't believe pointers or references can
be washed away (something I realized right after posting that article since
it seems to reduce to the halting problem), but parameters can be (if they
aren't pointers or references to a class with derived classes).  Since I
vaguely recall that pointers are a big negative issue (correct me if I'm
wrong) in ML because of the structural sharing involved and the preference
for copying values, it occured to me that a language could theoretically be
statically typed, have polymorphism, and require no implementation tricks
iff the bodies of all polymorphic functions were available and no pointers
were used, otherwise, they'd require the same implementation tricks we use
in OO.

bob
objsys@netcom.com
Newsgroups: comp.object
From: conrozi@kk188.ericsson.se (Roman Zielinski TT/TSM)
Subject: OO Doc Tool 1.03b for win3.0/3.1
Organization: Ericsson
Distribution: comp
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1992 10:46:20 GMT

The new release (1.03b) of OO Documentation Tool is now available.
It operates under win 3.0 and 3.1. (3.1 may need an extra parameter
in win.ini, see included doc).

I've sent the tool to simtel and garbo TODAY, and also e-mailed to
some users I knew having problems.

It can be fetched from garbo.uwasa.fi and  SIMTEL20.
(Note oot-1-03.zip should be replaced by oot-103b.zip)

I've updated all the registered users during the last two weeks by
diskette distribution or e-mail. So if I missed you please let me know.
I would like to remind all the unlicensed users to register after the
4 weeks verification period.

As earlier the tool is distributed as shareware with :
- zero fee for students, 
- $50 for home users
- $150 for professional users (5 licenses)

Regards,
Roman Zielinski


----------------------------------------------------------------------
To fetch from garbo via e-mail send:

To: mailserv@garbo.uwasa.fi
Subject: garbo-request

send win3/util/oot-103b.zip
quit

----------------------------------------------------------------------
To fetch from simtel via e-mail send:

To: listserv@vm1.nodak.edu
Subject: SIMTEL20-request

/PDGET MAIL PD1:<msdos.windows3>oot-103b.zip UUENCODE

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Thats all!

Good luck,
Roman
From: conrozi@kk188.ericsson.se (Roman Zielinski TT/TSM)
Newsgroups: comp.object
Subject: OO Doc Tool 1.03b (for win 3.1+3.0)
Date: 13 Apr 92 15:55:35 GMT
Distribution: comp
Organization: Ericsson

My OO Documention Tool 1.03a and earlier does not work under
win 3.1 as some of you discovered. During the weekend I was
debugging the tool and found 2 bugs in MS Windows 3.1. One
of the bugs was easy to by pass, the second one is more dramatic
and would require larger redesign of the print-out handling. I still
try to find a quick solution...

How ever, I plan to upload to simtel and garbo the 1.03b version
in some day (may have some restrictions on printing). I send a new
info when I upload the tool.

Sorry for unconvinience.

Best regards,
Roman Zielinski
Newsgroups: comp.object,gnu.g++.help
From: Bob Hathaway <objsys@netcom.com>
Subject: Re: C++ binding vs. Obj-C binding
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 92 02:01:29 GMT
Organization: Object Systems
Followup-To: comp.object
Keywords: OOP, C++, Obj-C

In article <1992Apr14.164222.6999@pencom.com> sam@pencom.com writes:
>In article <0dwjqld.objsys@netcom.com> objsys@netcom.com (Bob Hathaway) writes:
  [On dynamically loaded objects and classes]
>I don't feel that that is an extreme example.  It seems to me to be easily  
>adaptable to learning systems etc.  It seems to me that the ability to  
>dynamically load classes, or objects is what you need for a flexible OODMS  
>also.  It's very useful for alot of situations.

Of course it's very useful for alot of situations (including the ones you
mention), you misunderstood me.  I meant that C++ (without extensions)
can't even perform simple dynamic messaging, let alone handle dynamic
classes.

bob
objsys@netcom.com

P.S.  After hearing about the Objective-C extensions to C++, I've just
  taken a look at GNU gcc 2.0 and found it provides either C, C++, or
  Objective-C, but I don't see the Objective-C extensions to C++ anywhere,
  am I missing something?
From: steven@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au (Steve Stergakis)
Newsgroups: comp.object
Subject: INFO NEEDED on OOA Methodologies
Date: 8 Apr 92 09:32:35 GMT
Organization: Monash University, Caulfield Campus


NOTE: this message has been posted for persons that either use, teach 
or have some opinion regarding current OOA methodologies being 
used...

THIS MESSAGE HAS BEEN CROSS POSTED TO MANY NEWS GROUPS.  PLEASE 
DISREGARD IT IF HAS BEEN POSTED TO AN INCORRECT AREA.

i am a postgraduate student who is currently studying OOA and 
would greatly appreciate any information regarding experience
you have had with object oriented methodologies

as i am about to write a critical review of the current OO methodologies i 
would appreciate if you could tell me which approach you prefer.. or if
you know of any article that have compared current OOA methods, that would
also be greatly appreciated...

i am especially interested in persons who use such methodologies 
in practice.. their extent of their use in your work area.. 
the type of work you do.... and your opinion!

PLEASE feel free to comment on any of the above questions.. if you do
not wish to relate specific information pertaining to your work /
work environment, then leave it out

NOTE: if possible please reply directly to me 

thanks in advance

+------------------------------------------------------------+
| Steven Stergakis      steven@monu6.monash.cc.edu.au        |
|                                                            |
|                       (Post Graduate)                      |
|                       Faculty of Computing and Information |
|                       Technology                           |
|                                                            |
|                       Monash University - Australia        | 
+------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: comp.object