Re: Sealed as Source Annotation

• To: info-dylan@ai.mit.edu
• Subject: Re: Sealed as Source Annotation
• From: "Maury Markowitz" <maury@remove_this.sympatico.ca.invalid>
• Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2000 17:00:01 -0400 (EDT)
• Cache-Post-Path: nnrp.gt.ca!unknown@216.18.48.229
• Organization: GT NAP News Service
• References: <B594BB23.8427%ptw@callitrope.com>
• Xref: traf.lcs.mit.edu comp.lang.dylan:12468

"P T Withington" <ptw@callitrope.com> wrote in message
B594BB23.8427%ptw@callitrope.com">news:B594BB23.8427%ptw@callitrope.com...
> I think I disagree with this idea, because I think part of the design (and
> contract) of a class is whether you expect it to be extended or not.  A
> class that you design to be open requires much more engineering than a
> sealed one.

  While this might be true, it seems to put the crat before the horse.  This
feature was (apparently) added to allow the compiler to do things, not for
the user to hide things.

Maury

• Re: Sealed as Source Annotation
• From: P T Withington <ptw@callitrope.com>

• Re: Sealed as Source Annotation
• From: P T Withington <ptw@callitrope.com>

• Prev: Re: Sealed as Source Annotation
• Next: Re: Sealed as Source Annotation
• Index(es):
  • Main
  • Thread