is Missing multiple inheritance in sqeak a drawback ?
Niko Schwarz
squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org
Sat Oct 12 10:56:06 UTC 2002
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Am Freitag, 11. Oktober 2002 21:41 schrieb Jason Rogers:
> IMHO, inheritance is quickly becoming _near_ to obsolete (not totally
> obsolete, just near to it). For years it was the rage, but it seems to
> me that good OO design really should emphasize the HAS-A relationship,
> not the IS-A.
I think I can agree with that last part. Mix-ins would accomblish that, maybe
/they/ are missing in squeak, not MI.
i guess the reason why theyre not present lies in the fact that mix-ins can be
emulated too easily via doesNotUnderstand:.
I guess enhancing squeak to support real mix-ins would be a matter of one
afternoon. I'd rather support that but MI, though I'm not sure if either of
both is really needed.
regards,
nick
- --
"We are on the verge: Today our program proved Fermat's next-to-last
theorem."
-- Epigrams in Programming, ACM SIGPLAN Sept. 1982
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
iD8DBQE9p//J3P3nmXTVnC8RAjF6AJ9T1AzE6I0Re3hUmmndTpGPNXK7mACgp/GB
qnbqJ8hDHNV6uUMQAH0C8jQ=
=afY2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|