DOCSLIB.ORG

Sather Provides Nonproprietary Access to Object-Oriented Programming

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Sather Provides Nonproprietary Access to Object-Oriented Programming OBJECT-ORIENTED PROGRAMMING Sather Provides Nonproprietary Access to Object-Oriented Programming Stephen M. Omohundro Sather supports strong typing, garbage collection, object-oriented dispatch, multiple inheritance, and parameterized types odern scientific com­ ware components. More and more oped to meet the needs of research puting is placing ever models use complex graph-based projects at the International Comput­ more stringent re­ structures such as neural networks er Science Institute (lCSI) , which quirements on the au­ for some portion of the representa­ required a simple, efficient, nonpro­ thors of scientific code, tiop. These tasks are far more like prietary, object-oriented language. and on the languages general-purpose computing than tra­ ICSI is involved in several areas that and programming environments that ditional scientific computing. The require the construction of complex they use. At one time, most scientists appropriate software tools are corre­ software for computationally inten­ were happy with systems that could spondingly more like the tools devel­ sive tasks. Examples include a gen­ efficiently execute relatively simple oped for general-purpose tasks. eral-purpose connectionist simulator, repetitive operations on fixed-sized Object-oriented programming a high-level vision system based on arrays. The tools appropriate for that has been one of the most notable complex geometric data structures, task are woefully inadequate for the recent developments in modern pro­ the support software for a high-speed challenges posed by the computa­ gramming languages. Unfortunately, paranel computing engine for speech tional sophistication of recent algor­ it is often associated with reduced recognition, and CAD tools for inte­ ithms for scientific computing. computational efficiency, and so has grated-circuit design. Such challenges take many not seemed appropriate for scientific We investigated several existing forms. For example, modern finite­ computing. This article describes a languages, including C++,6 Objec­ element code must adaptively change new language, "Sather," which was tive C,7 Eiffel,4,s Self,S Smalltalk,9 the structure of the underlying grid, designed to retain the powerful bene­ and CLOS.IO Only C++ was effi­ dynamically adding and deleting fits of object-oriented programming cient enough for our needs, but its nodes during a computation. Com­ without sacrificing efficiency.I,2,3 overall complexity and lack of gar­ plex geometry algorithms are re­ Sather was derived from the bage collection, object type tags quired for efficient manipulation and language Eiffel,4,5 and is designed to (needed for persistency and object visualization of geometric structures. be very efficient and simple, while distribution), and parameterized Modern nonlinear optimization tech­ supporting object-oriented dispatch, types, led us to begin our work with niques utilize many interacting soft- strong typing, mUltiple inheritance, Eiffel. Our experience with Eiffel parameterized types, garbage collec­ allowed us to identify the features Stephen M. Omohundro is a research scientist at The International Computer Science Institute. tion, and a clean syntax. Each of these that were essential for our purposes. 1947 Center Sr.. Suite 600. Berkeley, CA 94704; aspects will be described in turn in We required a nonproprietary com­ e-mail: [email protected]. this article. Sather was initially devel­ piler, however, to serve as a base for 444 COMPUTERS IN PHYSICS. VOL 6. NO.5. SEP/OCT 1992 Physics Academic - develeping a parallel object-oriented classes. This can simplify the debug­ language to run on new experimental ging process tremendously, and lead Software parallel hardware. to far greater reliability. Sather was developed to incorpo­ It is important to understand the PEER-REVIEWED rate the features of Eiffel that were benefits that object-oriented pro­ EDUCATIONAL SOFTWARE essential to us as well as others aimed gramming gives over traditional sub­ Published by the American Institute of Physics at enhancing efficiency and simpli­ routine libraries, which also aim to in cooperation with city. The initial Sather compiler was support reuse. A subroutine library American Physical Society written in Sather over the summer of makes it easy for newly-written code American Association ofPhysicB Teachers 1990. The compiler generates porta­ to make calls on old code, but does ble C code and links easily with not make it easy to get old code to call SCOIEDISIWUIIO! existing C code. In June 1991, ICSI new code. For example, one might made the language publicly available write a visualization package that by anonymous FTP over the Internet displays data on a certain kind of (from."ftp.icsLberkeley.edu" in the display by making calls on display United States, "ftp.gmd.de" in Eu­ interface routines. At some later time, rope, "lynx.csis.dit.csiro.au" in Aus­ one wishes to have the package tralia, and "sra.co.jp" in Japan). The display its output on a new kind of release includes documentation, a display. Without an object-oriented compiler, a symbolic debugger, a approach there is no easy way to get GNU emacs programming environ­ the previously written visualization ment, and several hundred library routines to make calls to the new GRADEBOOK classes. Within a few weeks of the display interface. release, several hundred research Another example might be a Russell A. Stevens groups from around the world had system that makes use of a matrix to obtained copies. Since that time new hold information. One might later GRADEBOOK provides class development has become an decide to use a sparse representation teachers with a fast, convenient international cooperative effort. for the matrix, and want to avoid way to record student scores and having to rewrite all the code that Why Object-Oriented Computing? compute grades automatically. operates on the matrix. In each of Some of the options are plus-or- . The primary desired benefit from these examples one. might want the minus grading, weighting scores object-oriented languages is the abi­ code sometimes to operate on one in up to ten categories, handling lity to effectively reuse code. In type of display or matrix, and some­ incomplete grades, granting extra Sather, one writes a program as a times on the other. In fact, the actual collection of modules called kind of display or matrix may not be credit, dropping low scores, and "classes." Each class should encapsu­ known until the calls are made. issuing interim reports. late a well-defined abstraction. If We use the term "object-orient­ The program can combine classes these abstractions are chosen careful­ ed dispatch" to refer to this late when calculating distributions ly, they can be used in a variety of choice of which code to actually and display the result in histo­ situations. For example, the Sather execute. In Sather, each class defines library has a vector class that encap­ the structure of corresponding "ob­ grams. Scores can be organized sulates the common operations on jects." The class corresponding to an on summary sheets or as indi­ vectors (e.g., addition, dot product, object defines its "type." Objects are vidual records for students. tensor product, etc.). An obvious chunks of memory that are dynami­ Includes 58-page User's Manual. benefit is that less code needs to be cally allocated while the program is written for an application if it can use running, and which h~lVe a set of For the IBM PC classes that have already been writ· routines associated with them. These ten. An even more important benefit routines form the "interface" to the is that the resulting code is often object, and are defined in its corre­ $149.95 with a ten-copy site license better written, more reliable, and sponding class. For example, the class $39.95 for members of AlP Member easier to debug. This is because DISPLAY_l might have an interface Societies programmers are willing to put more defined by the routines draw_line care and thought into writing and and draw_circle. Any code that debugging code that will be used in performs actions on an object of this TO ORDER many projects. In a good object­ type must do so via these routines. Order using Visa, MC, AmEx, check, or oriented environment, programming We might later define a class DIS­ institutional PO. Specify 3.5" or 5.25" format. should feel like gluing together pre­ PLAY_2 that also defines the routines S/H $3.50 for first item ($7.50 foreign) and $.75 existing building blocks to perform draw_line and draw_circle, but for each additional item. for a different kind of display. A TASL new functions. In such a setting one Box 8202, NCSU • Raleigh, NC 27695-8202 can be confident that most bugs will variable disp can be declared to hold lie in the 10% or so of newly-written objects of either of these types. Call Toll-Free (800) 955-TASL (919) 515-7447/FAX (919) 515-2682 code, and not in the 90% of the code When a call like disp.draw made up by well-tested library _1 ine is made, the actual type of the Ask for details of AlP's SATISFACTION GUARANTEE Circle number 11 on Reader Service Card COMPUTERS IN PHYSICS, VOL. 6, NO.5, SEP/OCT 1992 445 object held in disp is checked, and descendant of VECTOR in the hierar­ many object-oriented language~, ob­ the appropriate choice of draw chy. Object-oriented dispatching is jects of these types have tags or tag _line code is chosen to execute. This only performed on the second kind of bits that specify their type. At run­ provides wonderful flexibility, be­ declaration. When the type is precise­ time, extra tag-checking code must cause one can cause new code to be ly specified, the compiler generates run in addition to any operations called by old code by defining a new direct calls, which are exactly as performed on the objects.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Introduction Code Reuse
    The Sather Language: Efficient, Interactive, Object-Oriented Programming Stephen Omohundro Dr. Dobbs Journal Introduction Sather is an object oriented language which aims to be simple, efficient, interactive, safe, and non-proprietary. One way of placing it in the "space of languages" is to say that it aims to be as efficient as C, C++, or Fortran, as elegant and safe as Eiffel or CLU, and to support interactive programming and higher-order functions as well as Common Lisp, Scheme, or Smalltalk. Sather has parameterized classes, object-oriented dispatch, statically-checked strong typing, separate implementation and type inheritance, multiple inheritance, garbage collection, iteration abstraction, higher-order routines and iters, exception handling, constructors for arbitrary data structures, and assertions, preconditions, postconditions, and class invariants. This article describes the first few of these features. The development environment integrates an interpreter, a debugger, and a compiler. Sather programs can be compiled into portable C code and can efficiently link with C object files. Sather has a very unrestrictive license which allows its use in proprietary projects but encourages contribution to the public library. The original 0.2 version of the Sather compiler and tools was made available in June 1991. This article describes version 1.0. By the time the article appears, the combined 1.0 compiler/interpreter/debugger should be available on "ftp.icsi.berkeley.edu" and the newsgroup "comp.lang.sather" should be activated for discussion. Code Reuse The primary benefit promised by object-oriented languages is reuse of code. Sather programs consist of collections of modules called "classes" which encapsulate well-defined abstractions.
    [Show full text]
  • CLOS, Eiffel, and Sather: a Comparison
    CLOS, Eiffel, and Sather: A Comparison Heinz W. Schmidt-, Stephen M. Omohundrot " September, 1991 li ____________T_R_._91_-0_47____________~ INTERNATIONAL COMPUTER SCIENCE INSTITUTE 1947 Center Street, Suite 600 Berkeley, California 94704-1105 CLOS, Eiffel, and Sather: A Comparison Heinz W. Schmidt-, Stephen M. Omohundrot September, 1991 Abstract The Common Lisp Object System defines a powerful and flexible type system that builds on more than fifteen years of experience with object-oriented programming. Most current implementations include a comfortable suite of Lisp support tools in­ cluding an Emacs Lisp editor, an interpreter, an incremental compiler, a debugger, and an inspector that together promote rapid prototyping and design. What else might one want from a system? We argue that static typing yields earlier error detec­ tion, greater robustness, and higher efficiency and that greater simplicity and more orthogonality in the language constructs leads to a shorter learning curve and more in­ tuitive programming. These elements can be found in Eiffel and a new object-oriented language, Sather, that we are developing at leS!. Language simplicity and static typ­ ing are not for free,·though. Programmers have to pay with loss of polymorphism and flexibility in prototyping. We give a short comparison of CLOS, Eiffel and Sather, addressing both language and environment issues. The different approaches taken by the languages described in this paper have evolved to fulfill different needs. While we have only touched on the essential differ­ ences, we hope that this discussion will be helpful in understanding the advantages and disadvantages of each language. -ICSI, on leave from: Inst. f. Systemtechnik, GMD, Germany tICSI 1 Introduction Common Lisp [25] was developed to consolidate the best ideas from a long line of Lisp systems and has become an important standard.
    [Show full text]
  • Iterable Abstract Pattern Matching for Java
    JMatch: Iterable Abstract Pattern Matching for Java Jed Liu and Andrew C. Myers Computer Science Department Cornell University, Ithaca, New York Abstract. The JMatch language extends Java with iterable abstract pattern match- ing, pattern matching that is compatible with the data abstraction features of Java and makes iteration abstractions convenient. JMatch has ML-style deep pattern matching, but patterns can be abstract; they are not tied to algebraic data con- structors. A single JMatch method may be used in several modes; modes may share a single implementation as a boolean formula. Modal abstraction simplifies specification and implementation of abstract data types. This paper describes the JMatch language and its implementation. 1 Introduction Object-oriented languages have become a dominant programming paradigm, yet they still lack features considered useful in other languages. Functional languages offer expressive pattern matching. Logic programming languages provide powerful mech- anisms for iteration and backtracking. However, these useful features interact poorly with the data abstraction mechanisms central to object-oriented languages. Thus, ex- pressing some computations is awkward in object-oriented languages. In this paper we present the design and implementation of JMatch, a new object- oriented language that extends Java [GJS96] with support for iterable abstract pattern matching—a mechanism for pattern matching that is compatible with the data abstrac- tion features of Java and that makes iteration abstractions more convenient.
    [Show full text]
  • Concepts in Programming Languages
    Concepts in Programming Languages Alan Mycrofta Computer Laboratory University of Cambridge 2014–2015 (Easter Term) http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/teaching/1415/ConceptsPL/ aNotes largely due to Marcelo Fiore—but errors are my responsibility. 1 Practicalities Course web page: www.cl.cam.ac.uk/teaching/1415/ConceptsPL/ with lecture slides, exercise sheet, and reading material. One exam question. 2 Main books J. C. Mitchell. Concepts in programming languages. Cambridge University Press, 2003. T.W. Pratt and M. V.Zelkowitz. Programming Languages: Design and implementation (3RD EDITION). Prentice Hall, 1999. ⋆ M. L. Scott. Programming language pragmatics (2ND EDITION). Elsevier, 2006. R. Harper. Practical Foundations for Programming Languages. Cambridge University Press, 2013. 3 Context : so many programming languages Peter J. Landin: “The Next 700 Programming Languages”, CACM >>>>1966<<<<. Some programming-language ‘family trees’ (too big for slide): http://www.oreilly.com/go/languageposter http://www.levenez.com/lang/ http://rigaux.org/language-study/diagram.html http://www.rackspace.com/blog/ infographic-evolution-of-computer-languages/ Plan of this course: pick out interesting programming- language concepts and major evolutionary trends. 4 Topics I. Introduction and motivation. II. The first procedural language: FORTRAN (1954–58). III. The first declarative language: LISP (1958–62). IV. Block-structured procedural languages: Algol (1958–68), Pascal (1970). V. Object-oriented languages — Concepts and origins: Simula (1964–67), Smalltalk (1971–80). VI. Languages for concurrency and parallelism. VII. Types in programming languages: ML (1973–1978). VIII. Data abstraction and modularity: SML Modules (1984–97). IX. A modern language design: Scala (2007) X. Miscellaneous concepts 5 Topic I Introduction and motivation References: g g Chapter 1 of Concepts in programming languages by J.
    [Show full text]
  • Object-Oriented and Concurrent Program Design Issues in Ada 95
    Object-Oriented and Concurrent Program Design Issues in Ada 95 Stephen H. Kaisler Michael B. Feldman Director, Systems Architecture Professor of Engineering and Applied Science Office of the Sergeant at Arms Dept. of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science United States Senate George Washington University Washington, DC 20510 Washington, DC 20052 202-224-2582 202-994-6083 [email protected] [email protected] 1. ABSTRACT Kaisler [4] identified several design issues that arose 2. INTRODUCTION from developing a process for transforming object- oriented programs written in Ada 95 or other object- Kaisler [4] described research leading to a methodology oriented programming languages to process-oriented for converting object-oriented programs to process- programs written in Ada 95. These issues limit - in the oriented programs and, thereby, making the concurrency authors' opinion - the flexibility of Ada 95 in writing implicit in object-oriented programs explicit. This concurrent programs. These problems arise from research was motivated by the fact that writing specific decisions made by the Ada 95 designers. This concurrent programs is difficult to do - no general paper addresses three of these issues: circular methodology exists - and by our recognition of the references are invalid in packages, lack of a similarity between object-oriented and process-oriented subclassing mechanism for protected types, and an programs. inability to internally invoke access statements from within a task body. Our goal is to raise the Ada 95 We believed that object-oriented programs, which exhibit community's awareness concerning these design issues a potential for concurrency, could be converted to and provide some suggestions for correcting these process-oriented programs, thereby making the problems for a future revision of the Ada concurrency explicit.
    [Show full text]
  • The Australian National University Object Test Coverage Using Finite
    The Australian National University TR-CS-95-06 Object Test Coverage Using Finite State Machines Oscar Bosman and Heinz W. Schmidt September 1995 Joint Computer Science Technical Report Series Department of Computer Science Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology Computer Sciences Laboratory Research School of Information Sciences and Engineering This technical report series is published jointly by the Department of Computer Science, Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology, and the Computer Sciences Laboratory, Research School of Information Sciences and Engineering, The Australian National University. Please direct correspondence regarding this series to: Technical Reports Department of Computer Science Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology The Australian National University Canberra ACT 0200 Australia or send email to: [email protected] A list of technical reports, including some abstracts and copies of some full reports may be found at: http://cs.anu.edu.au/techreports/ Recent reports in this series: TR-CS-95-05 Jeffrey X. Yu, Kian-Lee Tan, and Xun Qu. On balancing workload in a highly mobile environment. August 1995. TR-CS-95-04 Department of Computer Science. Annual report 1994. August 1995. TR-CS-95-03 Douglas R. Sweet and Richard P. Brent. Error analysis of a partial pivoting method for structured matrices. June 1995. TR-CS-95-02 Jeffrey X. Yu and Kian-Lee Tan. Scheduling issues in partitioned temporal join. May 1995. TR-CS-95-01 Craig Eldershaw and Richard P. Brent. Factorization of large integers on some vector and parallel computers. January 1995. TR-CS-94-10 John N. Zigman and Peiyi Tang.
    [Show full text]
  • Sather 1.0 Tutorial
    INTERNATIONAL COMPUTER SCIENCE INSTITUTE Center St Suite BerkeleyCalifornia FAX I Sather Tutorial Michael Philippsen phlipp icsib erkeleyedu TR Version Decemb er Abstract This do cumentprovides basic information on how to obtain your copy of the Sather system and gives several p ointers to articles discussing Sather in more detail We thoroughly describ e the implementation of a basic chess program By carefully reading this do cument and the discussed example program you will learn enough ab out Sather to start programming in Sather yourself This do cumentis intended for programmers familiar with ob ject oriented languages such as Eiel or C General information on ob ject oriented programming can b e found in The main features of Sather are explained in detail wecover the dierence between subtyping and implementation inheritance and explain the implementation and usage of iters Moreover the example program intro duces all the class elements constants shared and ob ject attributes routines and iters are intro duced Most statements and most expressions are also discussed Where appropriate the usage of some basic features which are provided by the Sather libraries are demonstrated The Tutorial is completed by showing how an external class can b e used to interface to a C program On leave from Department of Computer Science University of Karlsruhe Germany Contents Ab out Sather Where can I nd Sather Where can I read ab out Sather Related Work SatherK Planned Changes to this Tutorial
    [Show full text]
  • Programming with Assertions: a Prospectus
    Assertions can help improve software quality. To use them effectively, it’s important to determine when they are valid. Brian A. Malloy and Jeffrey M. Voas SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT Programming with Assertions: A Prospectus recent report states that after five Tech., May 2002). With all these hurdles, it’s no decades of software development, wonder why practitioners are looking for alterna- defective software is the norm, high- tives to testing. quality software the exception (“50 AYears of Software: Key Principles for Quality,” ONE ALTERNATIVE: ASSERTIONS J.A. Whittaker and J.M. Voas, IT Professional, An alternative to testing that has increasing pop- Nov.-Dec. 2002, pp. 28-35).This is a disappointing ularity and usage entails the use of assertions to observation in view of the many advances that monitor the data attributes of functions or classes. software development has realized, including the Assertions are formal constraints on the behavior emergence of software process improvement and of a software application; Alan Turing originally the adoption of object technology, including a advocated their use in 1950 (“The Emperor’s Old Unified Modeling Language (UML). Clothes,” C. Hoare, Comm.ACM, Feb. 1981): All these advances facilitate the design of object- oriented systems and the development of compo- An early advocate of using assertions in pro- nent-based software.Clearly,to address the quality gramming was none other than Alan Turing him- problem for software, developers need a technol- self. On 24 June 1950 at a conference in ogy that specializes in producing robust software. Cambridge, he gave a short talk entitled One widely used process that supports the con- “Checking a Large Routine” which explains the struction of quality software is testing, which exe- idea with great clarity.
    [Show full text]
  • Revisiting Coroutines
    6 Revisiting Coroutines ANA LUCIA´ DE MOURA and ROBERTO IERUSALIMSCHY Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro (PUC–Rio) This article advocates the revival of coroutines as a convenient general control abstraction. After proposing a new classification of coroutines, we introduce the concept of full asymmetric coroutines and provide a precise definition for it through an operational semantics. We then demonstrate that full coroutines have an expressive power equivalent to one-shot continuations and one-shot delimited continuations. We also show that full asymmetric coroutines and one-shot delimited continuations have many similarities, and therefore present comparable benefits. Nevertheless, coroutines are easier implemented and understood, especially in the realm of procedural languages. Categories and Subject Descriptors: D.3.3 [Programming Languages]: Language Constructs and Features—Control structures, coroutines General Terms: Design, Languages Additional Key Words and Phrases: Continuations, generators, multitasking ACM Reference Format: de Moura, A. L. and Ierusalimschy, R. 2009. Revisiting coroutines. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 31, 2, Article 6 (February 2009), 31 pages. DOI = 10.1145/1462166.1462167 http:// doi.acm.org/10.1145/1462166.1462167 1. INTRODUCTION The concept of coroutines was introduced in the early 1960’s and constitutes one of the oldest proposals of a general control abstraction. It is attributed to Conway, who described coroutines as “subroutines who act as the master pro- gram,” and implemented this construct to
    [Show full text]
  • The Cecil Language Specification and Rationale Version 3.2
    The Cecil Language Specification and Rationale Version 3.2 Craig Chambers and the Cecil Group Department of Computer Science and Engineering University of Washington Box 352350, Seattle, Washington 98195-2350 USA February, 2004 Abstract Cecil is a purely object-oriented language intended to support rapid construction of high-quality, extensible software. Cecil combines multi-methods with a simple classless object model, a kind of dynamic inheritance, modules, and optional static type checking. Instance variables in Cecil are accessed solely through messages, allowing instance variables to be replaced or overridden by methods and vice versa. Cecil’s predicate objects mechanism allows an object to be classified automatically based on its run-time (mutable) state. Cecil’s static type system distinguishes between subtyping and code inheritance, but Cecil enables these two graphs to be described with a single set of declarations, streamlining the common case where the two graphs are parallel. Cecil includes a fairly flexible form of parameterization, including explicitly parameterized objects, types, and methods, as well as implicitly parameterized methods related to the polymorphic functions commonly found in functional languages. By making type declarations optional, Cecil aims to allow mixing of and migration between exploratory and production programming styles. Cecil supports a module mechanism that enables independently-developed subsystems to be encapsulated, allowing them to be type-checked and reasoned about in isolation despite the presence of multi-methods and subclassing. Objects can be extended externally with additional methods and instance variables, often encapsulated in separate modules, supporting a kind of role- based or subject-oriented programming style. This document mixes the specification of the language with discussions of design issues and explanations of the reasoning that led to various design decisions.
    [Show full text]
  • Engineering a Programming Language
    .. 209 Engineering a Programming Language: The language design process has been intimately coupled with the design The Type and Class System of Sather ad Implementation of libraries and applications. A particularly demanding ap­ lllieation is the extensible ICSI connectionist network simulator: ICSIM [24J. examples in this paper are taken from the actual code and structure of Clemens Szyperski, Stephen Omohundro, and Stephan Muter Sather libraries and applications to make them realistic. The design effort continually a balance between the needs of applications and constraints on International Computer Science Institute JIIIguage design, such as simplicity and orthogonality. 1947 Center St, Suite 600 ., One of the most fundamental aspects of the Sather 1.0 design is its type Berkeley, CA 94704 ""em. Earlier versions of the language were strongly typed, but it was not Email: {szyperski, om, murer)@icsLberkeley.edu ,J'088ible to statically check a system for type correctness. Eiffel has tbe same Fax: +1 510643-7684 (5), and attempts to solve it by introducing system-level type-checking This is a conservative system-wide global check. A system which satisfies ebeck will be type safe but many legal programs are rejected. Adding new Abstract. Sather 1.0 is a programming language whose design hill! re­ to a system can cause previously correct code to become incorrect. sulted from the interplay of many criteria. It attempts to support a , Sather 1.0 solved this and other problems by completely redesigning the powerful object-oriented paradigm without sacrificing either the com­ putational performance of traditional procedural languages or support t)'pe and class system.
    [Show full text]
  • NIC) NIC Series Volume 27
    Publication Series of the John von Neumann Institute for Computing (NIC) NIC Series Volume 27 John von Neumann Institute for Computing (NIC) Jorg¨ Striegnitz and Kei Davis (Eds.) Joint proceedings of the Workshops on Multiparadigm Programming with Object-Oriented Languages (MPOOL’03) Declarative Programming in the Context of Object-Oriented Languages (DP-COOL’03) organized by John von Neumann Institute for Computing in cooperation with the Los Alamos National Laboratory, New Mexico, USA NIC Series Volume 27 ISBN 3-00-016005-1 Die Deutsche Bibliothek – CIP-Cataloguing-in-Publication-Data A catalogue record for this publication is available from Die Deutsche Bibliothek. Publisher: NIC-Directors Distributor: NIC-Secretariat Research Centre J¨ulich 52425 J¨ulich Germany Internet: www.fz-juelich.de/nic Printer: Graphische Betriebe, Forschungszentrum J¨ulich c 2005 by John von Neumann Institute for Computing Permission to make digital or hard copies of portions of this work for personal or classroom use is granted provided that the copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. To copy otherwise requires prior specific permission by the publisher mentioned above. NIC Series Volume 27 ISBN 3-00-016005-1 Table of Contents A Static C++ Object-Oriented Programming (SCOOP) Paradigm Mixing Benefits of Traditional OOP and Generic Programming .................... 1 Nicolas Burrus, Alexandre Duret-Lutz, Thierry Geraud,´ David Lesage, Raphael¨ Poss Object-Model Independence via Code Implants........................... 35 Michał Cierniak, Neal Glew, Spyridon Triantafyllis, Marsha Eng, Brian Lewis, James Stichnoth The ConS/* Programming Languages .................................. 49 Matthias M.
    [Show full text]