RE: [opengoop inheritance] Virtual Methods should be called Dynamic Methods

SourceForge Headquarters 225 Broadway Suite 1600 San Diego, CA 92101 +1 (858) 422-6466

Hi All,

I'm new to the list so let me first introduce myself
as quickly as possible:
Derek Shpuniarsky
San Jose/SF Bay Area
Many years of LabVIEW development
Some textbook knowledge of OOP through a software
engineering book and learning (beginner level) C++.

I'm loooking forward to working on this project with
all of you and hope I am able to contribute as much as
I learn.

Now M2C...

It seems to me, the best name for these types of
methods/classes depends on the context. During 'high
level' system design (i.e. at the stage where we only
care that we will be using an oscilloscope and not an
HP<whatever>) it would be best to call them Abstract
Methods/Classes since they aren't tied to a particular
implementation. When implementing them in the code it
would be best to use the term Dynamic, as in "Dynamic
Method/Class Call Interface", since it describes its
function.

This leads me to agree with Jim, that we should use
the term Abstract Method/Class. However the definition
for this term should contain 'dynamic' since it
describes how it is implemented. 

BTW, has a glossary of terms been started?

Derek

--- Jim Kring <ji...@ji...> wrote:
> Niels and Bjørnar,
> 
> After listening to the arguments you both make, I
> agree that "abstract"
> might be the best term to use, rather than
> "dynamic".  Also, I think that
> "prototype" has an OOP design pattern (Gang of Four)
> definition and
> "template" has an edit-time connotation, which make
> these two choices not
> very attractive.
> 
> -Jim
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From:
> ope...@li... 
> >
>
[mailto:ope...@li...]
> 
> > On Behalf Of Svingen Bjørnar
> > Sent: Friday, November 07, 2003 12:23 AM
> > To:
> 'ope...@li...'
> > Subject: RE: [opengoop inheritance] Virtual
> Methods should be 
> > called Dynamic Methods
> > 
> > 
> > I only have limited experience with OOP from C++
> some years 
> > ago. IMO virtual, dynamic and abstract are
> misleading, since 
> > what you are defining is more of a template
> (dynamic 
> > template) or prototype. "Dynamic" is not that far
> off seen in 
> > context, but when left alone it sounds strange.
> All in all i 
> > think "abstract" is better.
> > 
> > Just my $0.02
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Niels Harre [mailto:ni...@ha...]
> > > Sent: 6. november 2003 23:22
> > > To:
> ope...@li...
> > > Subject: Re: [opengoop inheritance] Virtual
> Methods should 
> > be called 
> > > Dynamic Methods
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Howdy,
> > > 
> > > I've given the suggestion some thought.. I agree
> that
> > > "Virtual Virtual 
> > > Instruments" doesn't sound too good. But I'm not
> too sure we 
> > > should change 
> > > the name to "Dynamic Methods".
> > > 
> > > The case with double adjectives in "Virtual
> Virtual
> > > Instrument" may also 
> > > arise when using "Dynamic": Consider the
> explanation "A 
> > > dynamic method 
> > > dynamically calls (using VI server) a method in
> a descendant 
> > > class". In my 
> > > opinion pretty much the same, and too close to
> the underlying 
> > > technology.
> > > 
> > > The question is: What is a "Virtual Method"
> thought to accomplish?
> > > 
> > > - it defines an interface (the connector pane).
> > > - it has no implementation in the class where it
> is defined.
> > > - its implementation is deferred to a descendant
> class.
> > > 
> > > That is an abstraction... consequently I suggest
> that
> > > "Virtual Methods" 
> > > should be called "Abstract Methods". Also, -
> taking it a step 
> > > further - 
> > > what about classes having the same features as
> listed 
> > > above... Should they 
> > > be called "Dynamic Classes". The class itself is
> not dynamic. 
> > > However, - 
> > > "Abstract Classes" are abstractions...
> > > 
> > > Please let me know what you think. Even though I
> don't belive
> > > we should 
> > > spend too much time on this.
> > > 
> > > All the best
> > > Niels
> > > 
> > > At 20:16 05-11-2003 +0000, Jim wrote:
> > > >Hello All,
> > > >
> > > >Stephen Mercer, a member of the LabVIEW
> Development Team at
> > > NI, attended our
> > > >group meeting last night.  During the OpenGOOP
> Inheritance
> > > discussion he
> > > >recommended that we call Virtual Methods
> "Dynamic Methods"
> > > to avoid confusion
> > > >with the term Virtual Instruments (we don't
> want Virtual Virtual 
> > > >Instruments).  I like this idea.  Any
> objections or comments?
> > > >
> > > >-Jim
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
>
>-------------------------------------------------------
> > > >This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net
> Giveback Program. Does 
> > > >SourceForge.net help you be more productive? 
> Does it
> > > >help you create better code?   SHARE THE LOVE,
> and help us help
> > > >YOU!  Click Here:
> http://sourceforge.net/donate/ 
> > > >_______________________________________________
> > > >OpenGToolkit-Developers mailing list 
> > > >Ope...@li...
> > > 
> > >>
>
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opengtoolkit-developers
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > >
>
-------------------------------------------------------
> > > This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net
> Giveback Program. Does 
> > > SourceForge.net help you be more productive? 
> Does it
> > > help you create better code?   SHARE THE LOVE,
> and help us help
> > > YOU!  Click Here: http://sourceforge.net/donate/
> 
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > OpenGToolkit-Developers mailing list 
> > > Ope...@li...
> > >
>
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opengtoolkit-developers
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> >
>
-------------------------------------------------------
> > This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback
> Program. 
> > Does SourceForge.net help you be more productive? 
> Does it
> > help you create better code?   SHARE THE LOVE, and
> help us help
> > YOU!  Click Here: http://sourceforge.net/donate/ 
> > _______________________________________________
> > OpenGToolkit-Developers mailing list 
> > Ope...@li...
> >
>
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opengtoolkit-developers
> > 
> 
> 
> 
>
-------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: SF.net Giveback
> Program.
> Does SourceForge.net help you be more productive? 
> Does it
> help you create better code?   SHARE THE LOVE, and
> help us help
> YOU!  Click Here: http://sourceforge.net/donate/
> _______________________________________________
> OpenGToolkit-Developers mailing list
> Ope...@li...
>
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opengtoolkit-developers