B. Liskov and J. Wing. Family Values: A Behavioral Notion of Subtyping. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems, November 1994. Home/Search Document Details and Download
Summary Related Articles Check |
This paper is cited in the following contexts:
Reuse and Inheritance in Distributed Object Systems - Gründer, Geihs (1996) (2 citations) (Correct)
....language to give a clue on the object behavior, which however hinders the automatic processing by computers. Consequently, providing reuse on the basis of a behavioral specification is not a very practical thing to do. For a thorough discussion of behavioral subtyping the reader is referred to [LW93b] LW93a] LW93c] and [Nie93] Implementations Reuse of program code in distributed object systems can be based on delegation, aggregation and inheritance. While the former two are used already in distributed systems, the latter is more difficult to achieve. We will present our solution after a ....
B. Liskov and J. Wing. Family Values: A Behavioral Notion of Subtyping. Technical Report CMU--CS--93--187, Computer Science Department, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, July 1993.
Thor/Theta Users Guide - Release Barbara Liskov Self-citation (Liskov) (Correct)
....in Appendix B. Auxiliary routines and classes are described in Appendix C. 1. 4 Related Documents ffl An overview of Thor is presented in [6] ffl The language independent interface of Thor is discussed in [5] ffl The Theta Reference Manual [4] ffl The Theta type system is described in [7]. ffl A discussion of remote mobile objects in Thor is in [2] ffl Garbage collection in Thor is analyzed in [9] ffl The performance of Thor on the OO7 benchmark [1] is evaluated in [3] 1.5 How this Guide is Organized The following section of this chapter, System Requirements, describes ....
B. Liskov and J. Wing. Family Values: A Behavioral Notion of Subtyping. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems, November 1994.
Theta Reference Manual - Preliminary Version Self-citation (Liskov) (Correct)
....Also, subtype methods that do not correspond to supertype methods should not do anything to the part of the subtype object state that is visible via the supertype methods that cannot be accomplished using supertype methods. A discussion of the meaning of the subtype relation can be found in [3]. Renamings should be avoided whenever possible. They are needed, however, when a type has multiple supertypes, and these supertypes have methods of the same name but different behavior, or methods of different names and the same behavior. A type specification provides no way to create objects of ....
B. Liskov and J. Wing. Family Values: A Behavioral Notion of Subtyping. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems, November 1994.
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