Re: Inherited Methods and such

["Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>]

On Tue, 18 Sep 2007 13:39:25 -0700, Maciej Sobczak wrote:

> On 18 Wrz, 17:25, "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mail...@dmitry-kazakov.de>
> wrote:
> 
>>> Then I'll pick that latter option. There is no pointer/reference to a
>>> specific type in C++.
>>
>> "this" within a constructor/destructor?
> 
> The dynamic type of the object is then equal to its static type (the
> dynamic type of the object *changes* during the process of
> construction/destruction).

Equivalently you could say that the object's type mutates upon dispatch,
and thus there is no specific types in Ada. These views are complementary.
As long as you don't distinguish T and T'Class you cannot tell what is
specific and what is not, and are forced to invent imaginary "static" and
"dynamic" substitute types.

But from behavioral point of view, the type is just equivalent to the
behavior of its values. If an object behaves as if it had a specific type,
then it just has that type, because there is no way to prove otherwise (by
means of writing a legal program capable to determine a difference).

-- 
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de