5:50:58 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: dude
5:51:02 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: yes
5:51:17 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: why not online whole day ? vedic math stuff ?
5:51:38 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: yeah and a small head ache
5:51:42 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: oh
5:51:47 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: alright i gotta nice qn
5:51:58 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: wats the diff between a adt and a class
5:52:29 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: ?
5:52:32 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: adt is a concept
5:52:36 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: a class is an implementation
5:52:37 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: ?
5:52:53 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: i can implement a stack adt na ? :-/
5:52:57 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: without a class
5:53:17 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: how?
5:53:54 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: hmm dont remeber the syntax right now.. but im sure asiro taught implem of adt in C
5:54:04 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: hmm well yeah ok
5:54:10 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: but it isnt an ADT in the true sense
5:54:16 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: there is no encapsulation in C
5:56:46 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: well?
5:56:54 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: cant i just say an ADT is just the structural programming equiv of class ?
5:57:55 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: well ?
5:58:03 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: no
5:58:07 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: ADT is a concept
5:58:26 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: structures, classes, etc are tools for implementing this concept
5:59:15 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: alright.. see this from wiki.. In object-oriented parlance, an ADT is a class; an instance of an ADT or class is an object.
5:59:20 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: wat do u think abt this
5:59:26 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: right
5:59:38 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: in C++ ADTs are implemented using Classes
5:59:46 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: so ? we call ADT's as classes in oo paradigm
5:59:54 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: its like saying dog in english and hindi
6:00:28 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: in oo parlance ADT is a class.. not implemented as classes
6:00:59 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: implented using classes
6:01:01 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: not as
6:01:07 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: actually anything
6:01:13 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: my phrasing is probably wrong
6:01:23 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: but do you get the difference i am trying to point out?
6:01:48 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: sorta
6:02:00 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: an ADT simply means a set of functions and DS on which the functions can be applied
6:02:14 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: the functions should define the only way of interacting with the intenal DSs
6:02:25 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: yeah
6:02:26 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: so much so that the entire ADT looks like a DS to the user
6:02:34 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: thats fine
6:04:48 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: no da i think u cant call it a ADT once u enter the oo paradigm.. u change over to classes when u r there
6:04:57 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: again
6:05:05 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: a class but a tool to implement ADTs
6:06:42 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: ok if u can say classes as implems, then suppose i have an abstract class called tree which is inherited by BinaryTree, AVLTree classes.. then wats the ADT here
6:07:00 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: u can say tree adt here cuz the tree class is itself not implemented
6:07:03 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: *cant
6:07:17 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: you are not catching my vibration
6:07:24 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: the ADT is Binary Tree
6:07:33 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: it is defined using the tree Class
6:09:15 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: hmmm
6:10:44 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: then why does wiki say so ? i mean.. translate it as it is.. in OO parlance.. which is like saying in english language.. ADT is a class.. which is like saying "naai" is "dog"
6:10:58 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: so in english language naai is dog
6:11:21 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: i dont see what you are getting at
6:11:26 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: seems clear enough to me
6:11:47 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: its like saying THe same word in diff langs illa.. and hence u cant differentiate between them
6:11:55 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: see its like asking wats the diff between naai and dog
6:12:09 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: your analogies are all wrong
6:12:19 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: ADT is a much wider topic than classes
6:12:25 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: ADT is theoretical CS
6:12:33 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: dude yes da i get ur pt
6:12:38 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: classes is an ADT tool used in OO
6:12:45 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: but just explain wat that sentence as such means
6:13:17 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: i dont know
6:13:19 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: i dont care
6:13:33 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: that isnt logical
6:13:41 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: good for you
6:13:56 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: hmmph
6:14:18 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: u dont like to argue and analyse do u.. just yell ur pt, stamp your foot and walk away
6:14:39 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: no use arguing at someone who repeats the same thing again and again
6:14:46 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: i explained it to you
6:14:51 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: and you dont read what i said
6:14:53 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: and i said i got it
6:15:00 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: good
6:15:02 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: so case closed?
6:16:04 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: ur explanation is fine da.. u have answered the original qn.. but that sentence isnt clear still.. it actually doesnt agree with what u say
6:16:24 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: where does it not agree
6:17:12 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: ok just tell me the meaning of in object oriented parlance, adt "is" class..
6:17:38 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: dont u feel that its like saying dog replaces naai in eng ?
6:17:45 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: dog is naai
6:17:50 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: in C++ talk ADTs are nothing but classes
6:17:51 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: ?
6:17:56 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: yeah
6:18:01 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: and?
6:18:44 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: ADT's are classes da.. which is to say there is no ADT when u talk abt classes and vice versa
6:18:57 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: its like s/ADT/class/g
6:19:07 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: no ADT ll be there
6:19:12 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: in C++? yes
6:19:16 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: yes
6:19:20 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: in C? no
6:19:26 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: agreed
6:19:27 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: in Python? Yes
6:19:30 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: in Lisp? no
6:19:36 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: fine
6:19:38 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: so what is your point?
6:20:10 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: so if u can say i replace ADT with class in OO paradigm, why cant i say they are equivalents ?
6:20:22 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: in diff paradigms
6:20:33 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: because ADT is implementation free?
6:20:48 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: adt means the same thing irrespective of what language you are taklng about?
6:21:29 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: its like when you say `tar' you mean an app which can create and extract tar balls... but i have different implementations of tar
6:21:36 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: GNU, Apple, Plan9, Sun
6:21:37 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: etc
6:23:04 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: so u still say ADT is a concept and it is implemented in diff paradigms.. in OO paradigm its implem is class
6:23:12 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: yes
6:24:32 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: wat i say (going by that senetnce alone) is .. class is also a concept and it *is*(not implem of) OO's equivalent of ADT
6:24:51 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: ok i dont agree
6:25:41 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: but class is a concept in OO right ?
6:25:49 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: yes
6:34:26 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: :)
6:34:31 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: wat
6:34:36 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: i am all grouchy huh?
6:35:00 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: sometimes
6:36:20 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: the ball is in ptr's court now
6:36:24 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: i pasted our conv
6:36:29 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: hmm
6:36:45 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: er
6:36:57 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: i know what is said is right
6:37:00 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: can u paste our conv from the msg where i aked the qn..
6:37:07 PM prashmohan@gmail.com: too bad you are thinking on the same wave length
6:37:07 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: i did
6:37:24 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: but my msgr as i told u doesnt show nicks
6:37:29 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: can u pastebbin it
6:37:42 PM raiden.202@gmail.com: illa nevertheless he asked to see it