Final by default?
Ola Fosheim Grøstad" <ola.fosheim.grostad+dlang at gmail.com>
Ola Fosheim Grøstad" <ola.fosheim.grostad+dlang at gmail.com>
Sun Mar 16 08:25:30 PDT 2014
On Sunday, 16 March 2014 at 13:23:33 UTC, Araq wrote:
> I note that you are not able to counter my argument and so you
> escape to the meta level. But don't worry, I won't reply
> anymore.
Discussing OO without a context is kind of pointless since there
is multiple schools in the OO arena. The two main ones being:
1. The original OO analysis & design set forth by the people
behind Simula67. Which basically is about representing
abstractions (subsets) of the real word in the computer.
2. The ADT approach which you find in C++ std libraries & co.
These two perspectives are largely orthogonal…
That said, I think it to be odd to not use the term "virtual"
since it has a long history (Simula has the "virtual" keyword).
It would look like a case of being different for the sake of
being different.
Then again, I don't really mind virtual by default if whole
program optimization is still a future goal for D.
Ola.
More information about the Digitalmars-d
mailing list