Talk:Objectless Calls
Why couldn't the client needing to validate parameters inherit{NONE} from A_VALIDATOR instead of creating an instance?
Also your validation feature doesn't have a postcondition so it's really an incomplete contract. If your validation feature is supposed to ensure something, it needs to state that, otherwise you're just saying, in order to create this object it needs to satisfy this routine which can be overidden and since there's no postcondition, it could be overridden to mean anything including nothing and that's a bug.
Non-polymorphic inheritance shouldn't have a performance hit unless it's not being optimized, by definition they're monomorphic calls so they can be static and inlined.
--Clemahieu 14:43, 14 March 2008 (PDT)
class A_CLIENT inherit{NONE} A_VALIDATOR feature process (a_value: ?VALUE) local l_a: A do if is_valid_value (a_value) then create l_a.make (a_value) ... end end
--Peter gummer 04:42, 15 March 2008 (PDT) The redefinition of is_valid_value
is strengthening the precondition. This is contrary to Design by Contract. I think you have a valid point, Paul, but you need to come up with a decent example!
--Peter gummer 05:19, 15 March 2008 (PDT) I don't like your preferred placement of the objectless keyword, Paul, in front of the feature name. I think I would prefer it in the place of the do
; this is an alternative that you did not propose:
feature -- Access f: STRING_8 objectless end end
A problem with this is that it precludes the possibility of objectless once functions or objectless externals.
I can think of another possibility: in place of feature
. This would be out of step with any other Eiffel keyword; but considering that your whole proposal is out of step with Eiffel's insistence that all calls be targeted to an object, maybe it's appropriate!
objectless -- Access f: STRING_8 do end end
I think I like this. (In fact, why isn't frozen
like this?)