jrl@anuck.UUCP (j.r.lupien) (01/20/88)
Hello, Does anyone out there know the status of the OOPS library with respect to the "production release"? Also, can anyone help me with investigating similar types of object oriented support packages, particularly Advantage C++ (PC) compatible? Please respond by E mail. I will post a summary. Thank you, John R. Lupien ihnp4!mvuxa!anuxh!jrl
keith@nih-csl.UUCP (keith gorlen) (01/23/88)
In article <455@anuck.UUCP>, jrl@anuck.UUCP (j.r.lupien) writes: > Hello, > Does anyone out there know the status of the OOPS > library with respect to the "production release"? > My OOPS class library is still "guru-only" status. The code is solid, we're using it here in two large packages, and every so often I hear from others who are using it. It is "guru-only" because of the documentation. I never did get around to documenting many of the classes, and what documentation there is hasn't been kept up to date as OOPS has evolved, so the only way to really understand what's there is to read the header files and test programs. I have a new release in preparation for submission to the USENIX C++ tape that Peter Salus is assembling. In addition to some minor changes there are 4 new classes: Iterator, String, Regex, and Range. Iterator is a cleaner mechanism for iterating over Collections. The String package is a much more efficient version of the original OOPS String class, and has more functional SubString operations. Regex is a class built around the GNU Emacs regular expression pattern matcher, and instances of Range represent integer ranges used in conjunction with the String and Regex classes. I also did some decent documentation for the new classes. A paper describing OOPS was published recently: "An Object-Oriented Class Library for C++ Programs", Software -- Practice and Experience, Vol. 17(12), 899-922 December 1987. We are working on a book on OOPS, hopefully to be published late this year. I also plan to experiment with supporting multiple inheritance in OOPS when it is available in C++. -- Keith Gorlen phone: (301) 496-5363 Building 12A, Room 2017 uucp: uunet!ncifcrf.gov!nih-csl!keith National Institutes of Health Internet: keith%nih-csl@ncifcrf.gov Bethesda, MD 20892
grunwald@uiucdcsm.cs.uiuc.edu (01/28/88)
Can we gripe about OOPS in here? I'd like some general feedback from others who use OOPS. 1) I think that the OOPS names should be more long-winded for internal functions. I'm mainly thinking of 'release'. I've got a set of routines for OOPS/Extentions for a Discrete Event Simulation Evenvironment (OOPS/EDASE), and 'release' as a very different meaning in simulation programs. 'releaseInternalObjects' might be better. 2) There's too much of a tie-in to the provided 'process' notion -- it should be possible to not have the Exception stuff loaded. I'm using a thread notation which is cheaper than the process notation, primarily because it's designed for DAS, where I don't use any exceptions. Am I off base with this? dirk grunwald univ. of illinois