From: Sean O'Dell <sean@...>
Date: 2003-11-21T05:08:39+09:00
Subject: Re: "stereotyping" (was: Re: Strong Typing (Re: Managing metadata about attribute types)

On Thursday 20 November 2003 11:55 am, Austin Ziegler wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 04:24:59 +0900, Sean O'Dell wrote:
> > On Thursday 20 November 2003 11:15 am, Austin Ziegler wrote:
> >> Ever used RogueWave tools.h++? It's not really well documented,
> >> and I've had to open its source more than once in my career. This
> >> is an *expensive* commercial package. I don't know what platform
> >> you typically develop for, but this is *common* in Unix
> >> development.
> >
> > Never heard of it, but I assume it's a C++ library? Do the type
> > declarations help you figure it out at all? Do you open the .h
> > files usually or go straight to analyzing the .cpp source code
> > itself and look right past the function declarations?
>
> That you haven't heard of it strongly suggests you don't do Unix
> development, but I could be wrong. (RogueWave tools.h++ has been at
> two different Unix development sites that I've worked in since the
> mid 90s.)
>
> I view little difference between opening a .h file and opening a
> .cpp file -- in Ruby, they're one and the same. I start with the .h
> file, but move to the .cpp file as necessary.

No, you're correct.  The only development I've done on unix was on Sun OS back 
in 91 or 92 with my shell account at Netcom.  I programmed in C on it, but 
nothing very unixy ... no threads, no devices, etc.  Just ordinary 
shell-utility-type development.  Commands I piped stuff to.

The .h file is very informative, and not at all the same as searching around 
for Ruby methods.  If it is to you, then you're that sort of person ... it 
isn't even close to me.

	Sean O'Dell