mirrors/eiffel-org
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/EiffelSoftware/eiffel-org.git synced 2025-12-07 15:22:31 +01:00
Code Issues Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Replaced assignment attempt with object test.

Browse Source 
Author:halw
Date:2012-04-13T13:56:45.000000Z


git-svn-id: https://svn.eiffel.com/eiffel-org/trunk@1074 abb3cda0-5349-4a8f-a601-0c33ac3a8c38
This commit is contained in:
halw
2012-04-13 13:56:45 +00:00
parent 7269a8a613
commit 1be4aff563
1 changed files with 2 additions and 2 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

4
documentation/current/method/eiffel-tutorial-et/et-general-properties.wiki
View File

@@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ Here is an overview of the facilities supported by Eiffel: <br/>
* ''Polymorphism''. An entity (variable, argument etc.) can become attached to objects of many different types. * ''Polymorphism''. An entity (variable, argument etc.) can become attached to objects of many different types.
* ''Dynamic binding''. Calling a feature on an object always triggers the version of the feature specifically adapted to that object, even in the presence of polymorphism and redefinition. * ''Dynamic binding''. Calling a feature on an object always triggers the version of the feature specifically adapted to that object, even in the presence of polymorphism and redefinition.
* ''Static typing''. A compiler can check statically that all type combinations will be valid, so that no run-time situation will occur in which an attempt will be made to apply an inexistent feature to an object. * ''Static typing''. A compiler can check statically that all type combinations will be valid, so that no run-time situation will occur in which an attempt will be made to apply an inexistent feature to an object.
* ''Assignment attempt'' ("type narrowing"). It is possible to check at run time whether the type of an object conforms to a certain expectation, for example if the object comes from a database or a network. * ''Object test'' ("type narrowing"). It is possible to check at run time whether the type of an object conforms to a certain expectation, for example if the object comes from a database or a network.
* ''Multiple inheritance''. A class can inherit from any number of others. * ''Multiple inheritance''. A class can inherit from any number of others.
* ''Feature renaming''. To remove name clashes under multiple inheritance, or to give locally better names, a class can give a new name to an inherited feature. * ''Feature renaming''. To remove name clashes under multiple inheritance, or to give locally better names, a class can give a new name to an inherited feature.
* ''Repeated inheritance'': ''sharing and replication''. If, as a result of multiple inheritance, a class inherits from another through two or more paths, the class author can specify, for each repeatedly inherited feature, that it yields either one feature (sharing) or two (replication). * ''Repeated inheritance'': ''sharing and replication''. If, as a result of multiple inheritance, a class inherits from another through two or more paths, the class author can specify, for each repeatedly inherited feature, that it yields either one feature (sharing) or two (replication).
@@ -39,7 +39,7 @@ It is also useful, as in any design, to list some of what is '''not''' present i
* ''No union types'' (or record type with variants), which force the explicit enumeration of all variants; in contrast, inheritance is an open mechanism which permits the addition of variants at any time without changing existing code. * ''No union types'' (or record type with variants), which force the explicit enumeration of all variants; in contrast, inheritance is an open mechanism which permits the addition of variants at any time without changing existing code.
* ''No in-class overloading'', which by assigning the same name to different features within a single context, causes confusions, errors, and conflicts with object-oriented mechanisms such as dynamic binding. (Dynamic binding itself is a powerful form of inter-class overloading, without any of these dangers.) * ''No in-class overloading'', which by assigning the same name to different features within a single context, causes confusions, errors, and conflicts with object-oriented mechanisms such as dynamic binding. (Dynamic binding itself is a powerful form of inter-class overloading, without any of these dangers.)
* ''No goto instructions'' or similar control structures (break, exit, multiple-exit loops) which break the simplicity of the control flow and make it harder or impossible to reason about the software (in particular through loop invariants and variants). * ''No goto instructions'' or similar control structures (break, exit, multiple-exit loops) which break the simplicity of the control flow and make it harder or impossible to reason about the software (in particular through loop invariants and variants).
* ''No exceptions to the type rules''. To be credible, a type system must not allow unchecked "casts" converting from a type to another. (Safe cast-like operations are available through assignment attempt.) * ''No exceptions to the type rules''. To be credible, a type system must not allow unchecked "casts" converting from a type to another. (Safe cast-like operations are available through object test.)
* ''No side-effect expression operators'' confusing computation and modification. * ''No side-effect expression operators'' confusing computation and modification.
* ''No low-level pointers, no pointer arithmetic'', a well-known source of bugs. (There is however a type ''POINTER'', used for interfacing Eiffel with C and other languages.) * ''No low-level pointers, no pointer arithmetic'', a well-known source of bugs. (There is however a type ''POINTER'', used for interfacing Eiffel with C and other languages.)