hi diego


I will put online a paper that we just have finish to write that explain
why mixins are a problem (even gilad told us that we were right!).

I will send you the pdf.

> I'm not against traits at all but I have comments to do (note: I sent
> this comments to people behind traits months ago and I got no answer)
>
> What I don't like in traits is the procedure to resolve conflicts.  The
> politic to create a flat view of all the traits + super class produces
> some of the problems we find in multi-hierarchy inheritance.

The idea is with traits the composite entity is responsible to compose
and resolve the conflicts. Read the paper I will send you and let us 
know what
you do not like.


> Concretely I would like to hear from you (the traits team) why a
> flat-everything model is better than (my favorite) the mixins in
> Strongtalk [1].  As long as I understand, this model shared the 
> benefits
> of traits avoiding the problems when conflicts occurs.

No. Not at all. Explicit conflict is much better than implicit one
because you have the control while wiht implicit control you have to 
turn around.
You will understand when reading the paper.

> BTW, What about a first version of traits/mixins/callAsYouWant where
> conflicts are not allowed?

This makes no sense.

>   In this case we can start to move from the
> single-hierarchy while we find a way to resolve the conflicts.
>
> Cheers,
>
> -- Diego
>
> [1] http://www.cs.ucsb.edu/projects/strongtalk/big/mixins-paper.ps
>
>
>