William B. Clodius wrote:
>
> >Dear All,
> >
> >Personally, I'm a little bit in horror. I'm wondering why I don't
> >see any alarming messages about just one simple and visible issue:
> >EACH OBJECT INSTANCE is supposed to hold all pointers to methods.
>
> Be aware of the as if rule. You will find that most object oriented
> languages describe the methods as though they were part of the object,
> but the implementations utilize more efficient techniques. The current
> description has no intrinsic impact on performance.
I was already informed that new proposals exist and so my
objections may no longer be relevant. I'd like to thank
the people who sent me the pointers to more current reports.
In the mentioned 97-106 there were the following statements:
"A suggested implementaton would be to actually store the value
of the procedure pointer in the object."
and further
"The trade off of this implementation strategy is that objects
with a small number of data components, but a large number of
associated methods, would be artificially large."
I don't see an 'as if' clause.
This is just to explain that my interpretation of the proposal
97-106 probably wasn't a misunderstanding.
Regards,
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Artur Swietanowski mailto:[log in to unmask]
Institut fuer Statistik, Operations Research und Computerverfahren,
Universitaet Wien, Universitaetsstr. 5, A-1010 Wien, Austria
tel. +43 (1) 407 63 55 - 120 fax +43 (1) 406 41 59
----------------------------------------------------------------------
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|