MUD-Dev
mailing list archive
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]
Date:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Thread:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Index:
[ Author
| Date
| Thread
]
[MUD-Dev] Re: PDMud thread summary
On Tue, 27 Oct 1998 21:12:31 -0700, Chris Gray wrote:
} Static versus dynamic binding of function calls as a programming language
} feature I understand just fine. It was those words attached to a question
} about an object model that confused me. The object model and the
} programming language are strongly intertwined, but they *are* separate.
But an OO programming language has an object model as its foundation but there
are language independent object models (COM/DCOM, CORBA, ...)
} Anyway, I agree - having a way to attach function pointers (or whatever
} you choose to call them) to objects is extremely useful.
}
} >Now, to multiple dispatch. Multiple dispatch is what Scott Meyers (More
} >Effective C++) calls "Making functions virtual with respect to more than one
} >object". C++ and Java do not support this paradigm directly but there are
} >ways to simulate it.
}
} OK, definitely jargon then. So, like, er, the state of two objects
} determines which function is called for something?
More like the "class" of two (or more) objects.
Have fun,
Alex.
- Thread context:
- [MUD-Dev] Re: PDMud thread summary, (continued)
- [MUD-Dev] Re: PDMud thread summary,
Chris Gray cg#ami-cg,GraySage.Edmonton.AB.CA, Tue 27 Oct 1998, 06:05 GMT
- [MUD-Dev] Re: PDMud thread summary,
Chris Gray cg#ami-cg,GraySage.Edmonton.AB.CA, Tue 27 Oct 1998, 06:13 GMT
- [MUD-Dev] Re: PDMud thread summary,
Chris Gray cg#ami-cg,GraySage.Edmonton.AB.CA, Wed 28 Oct 1998, 04:14 GMT
- [MUD-Dev] PDMud thread summary,
Jon Leonard jleonard#divcom,slimy.com, Thu 22 Oct 1998, 08:39 GMT
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]