Re: A Change In Terminology: Monomorphic Objects. Polymorphic Objects
jaibuduvin@gmail.com (Le Chaud Lapin) wrote (abridged):
Nevertheless, I do not agree that the second form is not
object-oriented programming. I think both are object oriented
programming. I feel that a more appropriate nomenclature would have
been to refer to the former as polymorphic programming and the latter
as monomorphic programming, while still keeping in mind the pro's and
con's of each.
[...]
What shall we call the second type of programming? Concrete?
Monomophic? Dead?
Some people use the term "object-based" for code which uses abstract data
types without dynamic polymorphism. I don't like the term myself but it is
out there. For example, from:
http://www.cacs.louisiana.edu/~mgr/404/burks/pcinfo/progdocs/oofaq/s1f.htm
1.15) What Is The Difference Between Object-Based And Object-Oriented?
Object-Based Programming usually refers to objects without
inheritance [Cardelli 85] and hence without polymorphism, as in
'83 Ada and Modula-2.
There is also an entry on Wikipedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object-based
I would hardly call it "dead". Most of my own work uses dynamic
polymorphism only where the implementation can vary at run-time, or at
least at load-time, and that is fairly rare. (However, my classes do tend
to be heap-allocated and forward-declared, for dependency management.)
-- Dave Harris, Nottingham, UK.
--
[ See http://www.gotw.ca/resources/clcm.htm for info about ]
[ comp.lang.c++.moderated. First time posters: Do this! ]