From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,d85ddda7d974176
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news2.google.com!news.germany.com!newsfeed.utanet.at!newsfeed01.chello.at!newsfeed.arcor.de!newsspool2.arcor-online.net!news.arcor.de.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Subject: Re: MI Hownotto by Betrand Meyer
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.15.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de
Organization: cbb software GmbH
References: <1162043687.5674.10.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Sat, 28 Oct 2006 19:11:14 +0200
Message-ID: <1gg01bv89foip.16h83zektx82y.dlg@40tude.net>
NNTP-Posting-Date: 28 Oct 2006 19:10:58 CEST
NNTP-Posting-Host: 5b89f0c8.newsspool1.arcor-online.net
X-Trace: 
 DXC=lfRRS?bLBIR1`E>oC;JXEZic==]BZ:af^4Fo<]lROoRQ^YC2XCjHcbYPRRmU\80HXXDNcfSJ;bb[UIRnRBaCd<M^E?Lh`hc;;WY@5eDPg5KM5^
X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse@arcor.de
Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:7245
Date: 2006-10-28T19:10:58+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On Sat, 28 Oct 2006 15:54:48 +0200, Georg Bauhaus wrote:

> This week's EiffelWorld column by Bertrand Meyer has a note
> about construction procedures and multiple inheritance.
> I thought it might be interesting given a recent discussion
> in c.l.ada.
> 
> <quote ref="EiffelWorld Electronic Newsletter -- Vol. 33, No 2, Section 4">
> In particular, multiple inheritance just doesn't go well with the
> C++ idea, also retained in Java and C#, that a constructor (creation
> procedure) must start its execution by calling the constructor of
> its parent. As soon as you require this you are ruling out multiple
> inheritance, since with two parents or more there's no good reason for
> executing a particular parent's constructor before the others'; and
> the situation becomes even more hazy when these parents have a common
> ancestor -- repeated inheritance, the so called "diamond" structure.
> Hence complicated rules that probably about twelve people in the world
> understand, and fewer remember.</quote>

Hmm, maybe the quote was taken out of context, but I don't really think
that constructors are responsible "diamond." The issue, as I see it, is
deeper. It is independent on constructors and, notably, even on whether
implementation (like record members) or just interfaces are inherited.

MI definitely adds complexity. In C++ it is quite difficult to deal with,
and construction issues become catastrophic. But what were an alternative
to MI?

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