CLOS Eiffel and Sather: A Comparison (1991) [7 citations — 1 self]
ftp://ftp.icsi.berkeley.edu/pub/techreports/1991/t
http://www.icsi.berkeley.edu/~sather/Publications/
CACHED:
|
Popular Tags
No tags have been applied to this document.
BibTeX | Add To MetaCart
author = {Heinz W. Schmidt and Stephen M. Omohundrof},
title = {CLOS Eiffel and Sather: A Comparison},
institution = {in A. Paepcke (ed.): Object-Oriented Programming: The CLOS Perspective},
year = {1991}
}
Bookmarks
OpenURL
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 including 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 detection, greater robustness, and higher efficiency and that greater simplicity and more orthogonality in the language constructs leads to a shorter learning curve and more intuitive programming. These elements can be found in Eiffel and a new object-oriented language, Sather, that we are developing at ICSI. Language simplicity and static typing 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.
