Dan Sugalski wrote: > At 07:38 PM 9/28/00 +0000, Perl6 RFC Librarian wrote: > >These APIs should be documented separately from the implementation, in a > >language-independent and an object-oriented way. > > Unfortunately the two conflict. C, APL, Fortran, and COBOL aren't > particularly object-oriented... But those are implementation languages. UML is object oriented, and [i]language independent; a design expressed in UML could be implemented in a non-OO language. > I think, though, that the core interface should be procedural. I agree. We should not confuse OOD with OOP. -- John Porter Jetzt schalten wir das Radio an. Aus dem Lautsprecher klingt es dann...
- RFC 125 (v2) Components in the Perl Core Should Have W... Perl6 RFC Librarian
- Re: RFC 125 (v2) Components in the Perl Core Shou... Dan Sugalski
- Re: RFC 125 (v2) Components in the Perl Core ... John Porter
- Re: RFC 125 (v2) Components in the Perl C... Dan Sugalski
- Re: RFC 125 (v2) Components in the Pe... Peter Buckingham
- Re: RFC 125 (v2) Components in t... Dan Sugalski
- Re: RFC 125 (v2) Components ... Peter Buckingham
- Re: RFC 125 (v2) Components in the Perl C... Dan Sugalski
- Re: RFC 125 (v2) Components in the Pe... Philip Newton
- Re: RFC 125 (v2) Components in t... Dan Sugalski
- Re: RFC 125 (v2) Components ... Philip Newton
- Re: RFC 125 (v2) Compone... Dan Sugalski
- Re: Perl recommended rea... Dan Sugalski