Re: Clean Object Class Design -- Circle/Ellipse

"Bob Badour" <bbadour_at_golden.net> wrote:

>
>"Universe" <universe_at_NOdirectvSPAMinternet.com> wrote in message
>news:dhavrt022tsgncm9kphs4f84eeh05lcfhd_at_4ax.com...
>> bbadour_at_golden.net (Bob Badour) wrote:
>>
>> >"S Perryman" <q_at_deja.com> wrote in message
>news:<9pc243$hosvc$1_at_ID-75294.news.dfncis.de>...
>> >> >I find it very telling that almost every OO pundit has found it
>> >> >necessary to write an apologia explaining why the very real and
>> >> >natural subtype/supertype relationship between circle and ellipse
>> >> >does not apply in OO.
>> >>
>> >> Who are these "pundits" to whom you refer ??
>> >> I have seen certain people show a fundamental misunderstanding of the
>> >> problem, and then fall prey to that misunderstanding.
>> >>
>> >> But "apologia" ... ??
>> >
>> >Meyer, Stroustrup, Rumbaugh to name three.
>>
>> Where specifically? I've read much of Stroustrup and Rumbaugh and
>> I've never seen any such "apologia".
>
>Go to http://www.google.com/
>
>In the little box, type:
> stroustrup circle ellipse
>and click on the "Google Search" pushbutton.
>
>In the little box, type:
> bertrand meyer circle ellipse
>and click on the "Google Search" pushbutton.
>
>In the little box, type:
> rumbaugh circle ellipse
>and click on the "Google Search" pushbutton.
>

You made the silly, baseless assertion. If it was so clear, I'm sure you would 've copied and pasted *some* proof.

Elliott

--
  http://www.radix.net/~universe      ~*~ Enjoy! ~*~
      Hail OO Modelling! * Hail the Wireless Web!
_at_Elliott 2001 my comments ~ alt.*/comp.*/bitnet may quote