Gilad Bracha and Gary Lindstrom. Modularity meets inheritance. In Proceedings of the IEEE Computer Society International Conference on Computer Languages, pages 282--290, Washington, DC, April 1992. IEEE Computer Society.  Home/Search   Document Details and Download   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....of a system. There is usually no analogue to the signatures with abstract types in module systems, which can hide information about a binding outside the unit defining it. Recently, we see a convergence of the two worlds. Module systems have acquired a form of inheritance through mixin modules [18,2,3,9,7], first class modules [37] can play a role similar to objects, and recursive modules are also being investigated [16] On the object side, nested classes with virtual or abstract types [30,39,12] can model the essential properties of signatures with abstract types in ML like module systems [29] ....

G. Bracha and G. Lindstrom. Modularity meets inheritance. In Proceedings of the IEEE Computer Society International Conference on Computer Languages, pages 282--290, Washington, DC, 1992. IEEE Computer Society.

....implementa tion inheritance with mixin modules is based on incremental ex tensions only, and does not allow the overriding of existing definitions (Smalltalk style method overrides) Bracha and Cook [3] propose mixin classes as a construct for object oriented languages. Bracha and Lindstrom [4] extend the work of Bracha and Cook by proposing modules (object generators) as a more general notion than classes, from which classes and mixins may be derived using their suite of inheritance operations. Mitchell, Meldal and Madhay [22] consider the addition of object oriented constructs to ....

Gilad Bracha and Gary Lindstrom. Modularity meets inheritance. In International Conference on Computer Languages, pages 282-290. IEEE, 1992.

....more than one class, the resulting members of C are essentially the union of the members of its parents. A conflict occurs if C inherits from classes A and B and both A and B have a member x with different definitions. In this case, the classes are said to be incompatible and an error is returned [9]. This corresponds in model management to the user being unable to find an acceptable mapping. Subject oriented programming [15, 24, 25] is a programming paradigm that focuses on subjects rather than objects. A subject is a description of a number of objects and operations from one point of view. ....

Bracha, G. and Lindstrom, G., Modularity Meets Inheritance. Computer Languages Conference, 1992, 282-290. 21

....is usually no analogue to the signatures with abstract types in module systems, which can hide information about a binding outside the unit defining it. Recently, we see a convergence of the two worlds. Module systems have acquired a form of inheritance through mixin modules [DS96, AZ99, AZ02, BL92, Bra92] first class modules [Rus00] can play a role similar to objects, and recursive modules are also being investigated [CHP99] On the object side, nested classes with virtual or abstract types [MMP89, Tho97, BOW98] can model the essential properties of signatures with abstract types in ....

Gilad Bracha and Gary Lindstrom. Modularity meets inheritance. In Proceedings of the IEEE Computer Society International Conference on Computer Languages, pages 282--290, Washington, DC, 1992. IEEE Computer Society.

.... and Weck s generic wrappers [15] and Kniesel s object model Darwin [34] Mixins were first identified as linguistic abstractions for generalizing inheritance by Bracha and Cook [11] It was also Bracha who observed that inheritance can be seen as a mechanism for modular program composition [13]. With his work on the programming language Jigsaw [10] he lifts the notion of class based inheritance and overriding to the level of modules. A formal account of mixins and mixin based inheritance is given in [9,21,4] In particular, Bono, Patel, and Shmatikov s calculus of first class classes ....

G. Bracha and G. Lindstrom. Modularity meets inheritance. In Proceedings of the IEEE Computer Society International Conference on Computer Languages, pages 282--290, Washington, DC, 1992. IEEE Computer Society.

....over an arbitrary core calculus. The calculus supports various module composition mechanisms including mixin module composition with overriding. The work on mixin based composition goes back to Bracha who observed that inheritance can be seen as a general mechanism for modular program composition [8, 7]. With his work on the programming language Jigsaw [6] he lifts the notion of classbased inheritance and overriding to the level of modules. A consistent refinement of a family of classes is possible with the notion of mixin layers, introduced by Smaragdakis and Batory [48] Related to mixins is ....

G. Bracha and G. Lindstrom. Modularity meets inheritance. In Proceedings of the IEEE Computer Society International Conference on Computer Languages, pages 282--290, Washington, DC, 1992. IEEE Computer Society.

.... Weck s generic wrappers [BW00] and Kniesel s object model Darwin [Kni99] Mixins were first identified as linguistic abstractions for generalizing inheritance by Bracha and Cook [BC90] It was also Bracha who observed that inheritance can be seen as a mechanism for modular program composition [BL92] With his work on the programming language Jigsaw [Bra92] he lifts the notion of class based inheritance and overriding to the level of modules. A formal account of mixins and mixin based inheritance is given in [BPS99,FKF98,AZ98] In particular, Bono, Patel, and Shmatikov s calculus of ....

Gilad Bracha and Gary Lindstrom. Modularity meets inheritance. In Proceedings of the IEEE Computer Society International Conference on Computer Languages, pages 282--290, Washington, DC, 1992. IEEE Computer Society.

....CommonObjects [76] dialect of CLOS supports multiple inheritance without breaking encapsulation, but the language does not provide simple composition operators for mixins. Bracha has investigated the use of mixin modules as a general language for expressing inheritance and overriding in objects [7, 8, 9]. His system is based on earlier work by Cook [12] and its underlying semantics was more recently reformulated in categorical terms by Ancona and Zucca [5] Bracha s system gives the programmer a mechanism for defining modules (classes, in our sense) as a collection of attributes (methods) ....

Bracha, G. and G. Lindstrom. Modularity meets inheritance. In Proc. IEEE Computer Society International Conference on Computer Languages, pages 282-- 290, April 1992.

....CommonObjects [28] dialect of CLOS supports multiple inheritance without breaking encapsulation, but the language does not provide simple composition operators for mixins. Bracha has investigated the use of mixin modules as a general language for expressing inheritance and overriding in objects [6 8]. His system is based on earlier work by Cook [9] and its underlying semantics was more recently reformulated in categorical terms by Ancona and Zucca [5] Bracha s system gives the programmer a mechanism for defining modules (classes, in our sense) as a collection of attributes (methods) ....

Bracha, G., and Lindstrom, G. Modularity meets inheritance. In Proc. IEEE Computer Society International Conference on Computer Languages (Apr. 1992), pp. 282--290.

....is an explict composition stage, where super is statically bound to a composition specific superclass. In this way, the same subclass (mixin) can be statically applied to several base classes. However, inheritance enhanced with static polymorphism is the only composition flavor supported. Jigsaw [8] improves the modularity of the original mixinbased inheritance [7] by providing a suite of language operators that independently control several roles that classes play in standard languages such as combination of features, modification, encapsulation, name resolution, and sharing. This ....

G. Bracha and G. Lindstrom. Modularity meets inheritance. In Proceedings of IEEE Computer Society International Conference on Computer Languages, pages 282--290, Washington, DC, April 1992. IEEE Computer Society.

....metaprogramming systems in detail. Languages like BETA [M93] and Objective C have unique features that help to structure certain types of code. The System Modeling Language [LS83] and its successor Pebble [LB88] were early linking languages for parameterized modules similar to those in ML. Jigsaw [BL92] is a theoretical framework for modularity that defines a number of module operators, such as merging modules, modifying modules, instantiating a module, and renaming a module s members; although impractical as a language, it is a good standard for evaluating a module system s orthogonality. ....

Gilad Bracha and Gary Lindstrom. Modularity meets Inheritance. Proc. International Conference on Computer Languages, pages 282--290, San Francisco, April 1992.

....is, classes which can be applied to di erent superclasses. Recently, this notion has been recognized to be independent of the notion of class and it has been shown that module languages supporting mixins are very useful for enhancing software reuse in the context of programming in the large (see [5, 9, 1, 8]) We say that a module language supports mixin modules (mixin, for brevity 1 ) if it provides the following features: modules can be parametric, that is, their behavior depends on components, called imported , whose de nition is not known in the module but must be provided from the outside; ....

G. Bracha and G. Lindstrom. Modularity meets inheritance. In Proc. International Conference on Computer Languages, pages 282-290, San Francisco, April 1992. IEEE Computer Society.

....[24] or a similar mechanism, the same techniques would apply here. Since CLOS [12] programmers introduced mixin classes as a particular programming style in context of linearization based multiple inheritance, a related but separate concept of mixins and mixin based inheritance has emerged [2, 3, 23, 8]. Inheritance allows for the creation of one new class, based on zero or more superclasses and a specification of an increment (often with syntax like . containing a list of declarations) Mixins liberate the increment such that it can be applied to different superclasses. The semantic ....

....a list of declarations) Mixins liberate the increment such that it can be applied to different superclasses. The semantic denotation of an increment may be a function from classes to classes [8] a class like entity which can be composed with others using special mixin combination operators [2, 3], or even a method which enhances the structure of the enclosing object [23] In any case, the application of a mixin to an actual superclass resembles inheritance. This motivates the alternative term for mixins: abstract subclasses. In a statically typed language the not yet known superclass of ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Gilad Bracha and Gary Lindstrom. Modularity meets inheritance. In Proceedings of the IEEE Computer Society International Conference on Computer Languages, pages 282--290, Washington, DC, April 1992. IEEE Computer Society.

....and consists of a base implementation which ffl adds functionality to an object ffl may assume that the extended object provides other features. ffl may add local state to the object (or may extend the used domains, e.g. by error cases) Features are similar to abstract subclasses or mixins [5, 4]. The main difference is that we separate the core functionality of a subclass from overwriting methods of the superclass. We view overwriting more generally as a mechanism to resolve dependencies or interactions between features, i.e. some feature must behave differently in the presence of ....

G. Bracha and G. Lindstrom. Modularity meets inheritance. In Proc. International Conference on Computer Languages, San Francisco, April 1992. IEEE Computer Society.

....Keywords: object oriented language, mixin, class, inheritance, calculus, operational semantics, type system. 1 Introduction Mixins (classes parameterized over superclasses) have become a focus of active research both in the software engineering [43, 41, 25] and programming language design [11, 12, 10, 35, 30] communities. Mixin inheritance has been shown to be an expressive alternative to multiple inheritance and a powerful tool for implementing reusable class hierarchies. However, there has been a dearth of formal calculi to provide a theoretical foundation for mixin inheritance and, in particular, ....

G. Bracha and G. Lindstrom. Modularity meets inheritance. In Proc. International Conference on Computer Languages (ICCL '92), pages 282--290, 1992.

....most easily defined using our meta level framework. Note that the encapsulation abstraction depends on polymorphic form restriction of the underlying FORM calculus. The encapsulation abstraction defined in our model can be seen as a variant of the hide operator presented by Bracha and Lindstrom [BRA 92] It ensures that encapsulated methods become invisible to any client of a class level entity encapsulation is applied to. Intuitively, encapsulating a method l of a class A consists of (i) replacing dynamically dispatched self calls to l by statically dispatched calls and (ii) removing 14 ....

BRACHA G., LINDSTROM G., "Modularity Meets Inheritance", Proceedings of International Conference on Computer Languages, IEEE Computer Society, 1992, p. 282-- 290.

....to the encouraging experience that already exists in this regard in specification languages such as Clear [20] OBJ [66] ACT [39] Eqlog [61] and Maude [121] More generally speaking, it is also related to other formalism or language dependent approaches. The approach of Bracha and Lindstrom [19] in the context of object oriented languages using the lambda calculus as underlying formalism, and the metaobject protocol approach [84] are two good examples among a variety of other proposals in the object oriented programming area; the ML language is a fine example in the field of functional ....

G. Bracha and G. Lindstrom. Modularity meets inheritance. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Languages, pages 282--290. IEEE, 1992.

....[80] on reflection for survivable systems [73] and on metalogical foundations for reflection [56] will be extended in several ways. More generally, we will take into account many previous contributions by other researchers in the area of software architecture and module composition operations [6, 67, 15, 19, 8, 41, 36, 28, 75], in reflection [71, 70, 79, 76, 41, 38, 81, 7, 68, 39, 12, 53, 24, 37, 52, 61, 64, 69] and in recent approaches to interoperation [34, 13, 14, 42, 5, 1, 45, 20] The proposed research will lead to a new technology for composition, interoperation, and dynamic evolution of software systems. It ....

....have appeared in the literature. Some use the institutions general logics foundational ideas [6, 67, 15, 19] Other approaches are more particular in the sense of being formalism or language dependent, but also provide valuable ideas; for example, the approach proposed by Bracha and Lindstrom [8] in the context of object oriented languages using the lambda calculus as underlying formalism, and the metaobject protocol approach [41] are two good examples among a variety of other proposals in the object oriented programming area, and the ML language is a fine example in the field of ....

G. Bracha and G. Lindstrom. Modularity meets inheritance. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Languages, pages 282--290. IEEE, 1992.

....The key to achieving the abovementioned goals in the m calculus is the use of a more general notion of module together with a linking operation. An incomplete or abstract module (introduced as a mixin module or a mixin in [3] formalized in a calculus in [4] and related to the notions of mixin in [16, 17, 12, 11]) is a collection of components of which some are exported (externally visible) some are private, and some are declared but not defined. We call the latter deferred components. For example, consider the following incomplete modules M 1 and M 2 , where N(f,g,i) is an expression that depends on f, ....

.... present a system of mixin modules which has the unique feature that when both modules have components with the same name, linking the modules results in a form of merging of the same named components [16, 17] Bracha and Lindstrom encode mixins using calculus, records, and fix point operators [12, 11]. Findler and Flatt describe using mixins and incomplete modules in actual programming [18] Flatt and Krishnamurthi and Felleisen present a calculus with an operational semantics for mixins and classes in the context of Java [21] 5.3 Calculi for Cycles. Inspiring much of our formulation, Ariola ....

G. Bracha and G. Lindstrom. Modularity meets inheritance. In Proc. Int'l Conf. Computer Languages, pages 282--290, 1992.

....General Notion of Module The key to achieving the above mentioned goals in the m calculus is the use of a more general notion of module together with a linking operation. An incomplete or abstract module (called a mixin module or a mixin in [AZ98] and closely related to the notions of mixin in [DS96, DS98, BL92, Bra92]) is a collection of components of which some are exported (externally visible) some are private, and some are declared but not defined. We call the latter deferred components. Consider the following example incomplete modules M 1 and M 2 , where N(f,g,i) is an expression that depends on f, g, ....

.... M f i Gammai M i [x : M ] where M = f 1 = x)M 1 ; fn = x)Mn ] and 1 i n [f 1 = x)M 1 ; fn = x)Mn ] f i = x)M 0 Gammai [f 1 = x)M 1 ; f i = x)M 0 ; fn = x)Mn ] where 1 i n 14 More interestingly, the following encoding (inspired by [BL92]) is also easy, using a distinguished component name self . f 1 = x)M 1 ; fn = x)Mn ] fself . x = ffl; f 1 = M 1 ; fn = Mn g (M ( f = x)M 0 ) Mnf Phi [f = x)M 0 ] M f = let x = M in (x Phi fself = xg) f) where x is fresh The calculus rewrite rules are also ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Gilad Bracha and Gary Lindstrom. Modularity meets inheritance. In Proc. Int'l Conf. Computer Languages, pages 282--290, 1992.

.... invested in studying theoretical foundations and developing new forms of module systems; let us mention the wide literature about foundations and improvements of Standard ML (Milner et al. 1990) module system (see e.g. Leroy, 1994; Harper Lillibridge, 1994) the notions of mixins (see e.g. (Bracha, 1992; Duggan Sourelis, 1996; Flatt et al. 1998) and our previous work (Ancona Zucca, 1998a; Ancona Zucca, 1998b) and units (Flatt Felleisen, 1998) the type theoretical analysis of recursion between modules proposed in (Crary et al. 1999) Two principles which seem to emerge as common ideas ....

....on this idea, originally due to (Cook, 1989; Reddy, 1988) The notion of virtual frozen component is clearly independent of (even though inspired by) object oriented programming and can be applied (in principle) to any module language. For a more comprehensive treatment of this subject we refer to (Bracha, 1992), where this notion was introduced for the rst time, and (Ancona, 1998) Virtual components of DCMS can be easily encoded in pure CMS by allowing a component name to appear both in the input and output assignment. For instance, the module M1 is represented by [ v 7 V ; V 7 2 ; F 7 f ; Sum 7 v ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Bracha, G., & Lindstrom, G. (1992). Modularity meets inheritance. Pages 282-290 of: Proc. International Conference on Computer Languages. San Francisco: IEEE Computer Society.

....side, there are several works aimed at improving the expressiveness of the inheritance structure by relaxing the class subclass relationships that could also support modeling stand alone behavior that can be reused in several scenarios. This category includes the work on mixin based inheritance [4,5], contracts [10] mixinmethods [16] MixedJava [6] Rondo [18] and context relationship [20] These works share the fact that variations on a base behavior are modeled in stand alone artifacts called mixins in [4,5] and [6] contracts in [10] mixinmethods in [16] adjustments in [18] and ....

....in several scenarios. This category includes the work on mixin based inheritance [4,5] contracts [10] mixinmethods [16] MixedJava [6] Rondo [18] and context relationship [20] These works share the fact that variations on a base behavior are modeled in stand alone artifacts called mixins in [4,5] and [6] contracts in [10] mixinmethods in [16] adjustments in [18] and context objects in [20] These artifacts do not commit to any base behavior when defined. Rather, they refer to the base behavior by means of an (unbound) super parameter and the self reference. The individual approaches ....

Bracha, G., Lindstrom, G. Modularity meets Inheritance. In Proceedings of IEEE Computer Society International Conference on Computer Languages (Washington, DC, April 1992), IEEE Computer Society, pp. 282-290.

....side, there are several works aimed at improving the expressiveness of the inheritance structure by relaxing the class subclass relationships that could also support modeling stand alone behavior that can be reused in several scenarios. This category includes the work on mixin based inheritance [2,3], contracts [8] mixin methods [14] MixedJava [4] Rondo [16] and context relationship [18] These works share the fact that variations on a base behavior are modeled in stand alone artifacts called mixins in [2,3] and [4] contracts in [8] mixin methods in [14] adjustments in [16] and ....

....in several scenarios. This category includes the work on mixin based inheritance [2,3] contracts [8] mixin methods [14] MixedJava [4] Rondo [16] and context relationship [18] These works share the fact that variations on a base behavior are modeled in stand alone artifacts called mixins in [2,3] and [4] contracts in [8] mixin methods in [14] adjustments in [16] and context objects in [18] These artifacts do not commit to any base behavior when defined. Rather, they refer to the base behavior by means of an (unbound) super parameter and the self reference. The individual approaches ....

Bracha, Gilad, and Lindstrom, Gary. Modularity meets Inheritance. In Proceedings of IEEE Computer Society International Conference on Computer Languages (Washington, DC, April 1992), IEEE Computer Society, pp. 282-290.

....to the parametricity semantics in this paper. More recent work along this line is [12] Fisher and Mitchell [20] also relate classes to data abstraction. This work assumes a functional setting for objects, but some of the ideas deal with state. Work on specification of stateful objects includes [5, 28, 29, 30] in addressing subtyping issues and [3, 6] in addressing self reference issues. The major developments in the research on Algol like languages are collected in [43] Tennent [58] gives a gentle introduction to the concepts as of 1994. 2 The language IA The language IA is an extension of ....

....elems(s) f r map a (f 1 : r) s A Queue state represents a queue with elements s iff f r and the list of array elements between f 1 and r is s. Note that the predicate incorporates both the representation invariant and the representation function in America s terminology [5]. In fact, all of America s theory for class specifications is implicit in specification logic. 4 We are using unbounded arrays as an abstraction to finesse the technicalities of bounds. Clearly, both the specification and the implementation of Queue can be modified to deal with bounded ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

G. Bracha and G. Lindstrom. Modularity meets inheritance. In Proceedings of the IEEE Computer Society International Conference on Computer Languages, pages 282--290, Washington, DC, April 1992. IEEE Computer Society.

....side, there are several works aimed at improving the expressiveness of the inheritance structure by relaxing the class subclass relationships that could also support modeling stand alone behavior that can be reused in several scenarios. This category includes the work on mixin based inheritance [4,5], contracts [10] mixinmethods [16] MixedJava [6] Rondo [18] and context relationship [20] These works share the fact that variations on a base behavior are modeled in stand alone artifacts called mixins in [4,5] and [6] contracts in [10] mixinmethods in [16] adjustments in [18] and ....

....in several scenarios. This category includes the work on mixin based inheritance [4,5] contracts [10] mixinmethods [16] MixedJava [6] Rondo [18] and context relationship [20] These works share the fact that variations on a base behavior are modeled in stand alone artifacts called mixins in [4,5] and [6] contracts in [10] mixinmethods in [16] adjustments in [18] and context objects in [20] These artifacts do not commit to any base behavior when defined. Rather, they refer to the base behavior by means of an (unbound) super parameter and the self reference. The individual approaches ....

Bracha, G., Lindstrom, G.. Modularity meets Inheritance. In Proceedings of IEEE Computer Society International Conference on Computer Languages (Washington, DC, April 1992), IEEE Computer Society, pp. 282-290.

....class creation, as nicely illustrated through the jigsaw puzzle metaphore in [6] This paradigm is partly similar to that based on multiple inheritance, but avoids its complication. Mixin based programming has been now extensively studied both on the methodological and foundational point of view [7, 6, 8, 3, 1, 2]. The results can be summarized as follows. First, the mixin notion is not strictly related to object oriented programming but can be formulated in general in the context of module composition (a mixin module is a module where some components are not defined but expected to be provided by some ....

G. Bracha and G. Lindstrom. Modularity meets inheritance. In Proc. International Conference on Computer Languages, pages 282--290, San Francisco, April 1992. IEEE Computer Society.

....class creation, as nicely illustrated through the jigsaw puzzle metaphor in [6] This paradigm is partly similar to that based on multiple inheritance, but avoids its complication. Mixin based programming has been now extensively studied both on the methodological and foundational point of view [7,6,8,4,2,3]. The results can be summarized as follows. First, the mixin notion is not strictly related to object oriented programming but can be formulated in general in the context of module composition (a mixin module is a module where some components are not de ned but expected to be provided by some ....

G. Bracha and G. Lindstrom. Modularity meets inheritance. In Proc. International Conference on Computer Languages, pages 282-290, San Francisco, April 1992. IEEE Computer Society.

....of objects. Eiffel [21] has operations for redefining and undefining the methods of a class, much like our single renaming operation does in the first order calculus. We are not aware, however, of any formal accounts that establish the soundness of the Eiffel type system. Bracha and Lindstrom [5] define a coercive operation for hiding components of objects; this appears to behave similarly to our subsumption operation, at least for first order objects. They formalize this operation within an untyped calculus. More work has addressed the problems with object extension and subtyping. ....

Gilad Bracha and Gary Lindstrom. Modularity meets inheritance. In Proceedings of the IEEE Computer Society International Conference on Computer Languages, pages 282--290, Washington, DC, April 1992. IEEE Computer Society.

....computazione e dei linguaggi di programmazione and CNR Formalismi per la specifica e la descrizione di sistemi ad oggetti. Another important consideration that has emerged in the last years is related to the notion of modular module system [23] following the approach of SML [27] many authors [8,6,23,11] have recognized the usefulness both from the practical and the theoretical point of view of considering a module language as a language on its own which is independent of the underlying core language. The algebraic framework for modularization developed in [4,3,2] partially fulfills the ....

....exposed above. It is based on the well established theory of institutions [15] which allows an abstract approach to modularization [31,13] Indeed, the framework is parametric in the algebraic framework used for modeling the underlying core language. The framework allows to deal with mixins [8] and generic modules (e.g. SML functors) in a uniform way and to define three primitive operations from which many higher level operators commonly used in module languages can be derived [4,2] Since their semantics abstracts from a particular underlying language, they actually correspond to ....

G. Bracha and G. Lindstrom. Modularity meets inheritance. In Proc. International Conference on Computer Languages, pages 282--290, San Francisco, April 1992. IEEE Computer Society.

No context found.

Gilad Bracha and Gary Lindstrom. Modularity meets inheritance. In Proc. International Conference on Computer Languages, pages 282--290, San Francisco, CA, April 20-23 1992. IEEE Computer Society.

No context found.

Gilad Bracha and Gary Lindstrom. Modularity meets inheritance. In Proc. International Conference on Computer Languages, pages 282--290, San Francisco, CA, April 20--23, 1992. IEEE Computer Society. Also available as Technical Report UUCS-91-017.

No context found.

Gilad Bracha and Gary Lindstrom. Modularity meets inheritance. In Proc. International Conference on Computer Languages, pages 282--290, San Francisco, CA, April 20-23 1992. IEEE Computer Society.

No context found.

Bracha, G. and Lindstrom, G., (1992), "Modularity meets inheritance," in Proc. International Conference on Computer Languages, (San Francisco, CA), IEEE Computer Society, pp. 282-- 290. Also available as Technical Report UUCS-91-017.

....ones. One characterization of class based inheritance is that it is the combination of self referential namespaces [12] By carefully designing operations to manipulate such namespaces, a wide spectrum of effects of single and multiple inheritance can be obtained. Compositional modularity [3, 6] is such an inheritance model, in which self referential namespaces, known as modules, can be adapted and composed in various ways to achieve implementation reuse. Compositional modularity supports a stronger and more flexible reuse model than traditional class based inheritance. This research ....

....The crucial aspect of inheritance is that of self reference manipulation while combining classes during inheritance, a superclass notion of self must be properly modified to include that of the subclass. This is captured by the above definition. Based on Cook s work, Bracha and Lindstrom [6] developed a uniform and comprehensive suite of linguistic operations on a simple notion of classes known as modules, also modeled as generators. These operations individually achieve effects of rebinding, sharing, encapsulation, and static binding. In addition to making previously existing ....

Gilad Bracha and Gary Lindstrom. Modularity meets inheritance. In Proc. International Conference on Computer Languages, pages 282--290, San Francisco, CA, April 20--23, 1992. IEEE Computer Society. Also available as University of Utah Technical Report UUCS-91-017.

No context found.

Gilad Bracha and Gary Lindstrom. Modularity meets inheritance. In Proceedings of the IEEE Computer Society International Conference on Computer Languages, pages 282--290, Washington, DC, April 1992. IEEE Computer Society.

No context found.

G. Bracha and G. Lindstrom. Modularity meets inheritance. In Proceedings of the IEEE Computer Society International Conference on Computer Languages, pages 282--290, Washington, DC, April 1992. IEEE Computer Society.

No context found.

Gilad Bracha and Gary Lindstrom. Modularity meets inheritance. In Proc. Int'l Conf. Computer Languages, pages 282--290, 1992.

No context found.

Bracha, G. and Lindstrom, G. 1992. Modularity meets inheritance. In Proc. International Conference on Computer Languages. IEEE Computer Society, 282-290.

No context found.

G. Bracha and G. Lindstrom. Modularity meets inheritance. In Proc. International Conference on Computer Languages, pages 282--290, San Francisco, April 1992. IEEE Computer Society.

No context found.

Gilad Bracha and Gary Lindstrom. Modularity meets inheritance. In Proc. Int'l Conf. Computer Languages, pages 282--290, 1992.

No context found.

Bracha, G., Lindstrom, G.: Modularity meets inheritance. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Computer Society International Conference on Computer Languages, Washington, DC, IEEE Computer Society (1992) 282--290

No context found.

G. Bracha and G. Lindstrom. Modularity meets inheritance. In Proceedings of IEEE Computer Society International Conference on Computer languages, 1992.

No context found.

G. Bracha and G. Lindstrom. Modularity meets inheritance. In Proc. of IEEE International Conference on Computer Languages, April 1992.

No context found.

Bracha, G., Lindstrom, G.: Modularity meets inheritance. In: Proceedings of IEEE Computer Society International Conference on Computer languages. (1992)

No context found.

Gilad Bracha and Gary Lindstrom. Modularity meets inheritance. In Proceedings of the IEEE Computer Society International Conference on Computer Languages, pages 282290, Washington, DC, 1992. IEEE Computer Society.

No context found.

G. Bracha and G. Lindstrom. Modularity meets inheritance. In Proceedings of the IEEE Computer Society International Conference on Computer Languages, pages 282-290, Washington, DC, 1992. IEEE Computer Society.

No context found.

Bracha, G., Lindstrom, G.: Modularity meets inheritance. In: Proceedings of IEEE Computer Society International Conference on Computer languages. (1992)

No context found.

Bracha, G. and G. Lindstrom, Modularity meets inheritance, in: Proc. International Conference on Computer Languages (ICCL '92), 1992, pp. 282{ 290.

No context found.

G. Bracha and G. Lindstrom. Modularity meets inheritance. In Proc. International Conference on Computer Languages, pages 282-290, San Francisco, April 1992. IEEE Computer Society.

No context found.

Gilad Bracha and Gary Lindstrom. Modularity meets inheritance. In Proceed-

First 50 documents  Next 50

Online articles have much greater impact   More about CiteSeer.IST   Add search form to your site   Submit documents   Feedback  

CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC