Re: Preventing type extensions

[Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid>]

Replying to my own, very confused post:

> Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
>> On Tue, 14 Sep 2010 15:16:37 +0300, Niklas Holsti wrote:
>>
>>> If an operation of a parent type calls several other operations with 
>>> redispatching, and several derived types override these called
>>>  operations in diverse ways, perhaps you need to test the calling 
>>> operation separately for each derived class. But if I understand 
>>> Dmitry's standpoint correctly, he would avoid the redispatching by 
>>> overriding the calling operation for each derived class, giving the
>>> same total number of operations to be tested, right?
>>
>> No, I am trying not to override non-abstract or non-null operations.

To which I (Niklas) replied:

> Aha! *Now* I understand your concept.

... and then I went on to speak nonsense. I must have had such a 
blinding flash of understanding (of Dmitry) that I was dazzled. I'm 
better now, thanks, and I do still feel that I now understand Dmitry's 
approach, which seems very rigorous, almost ascetic in its constraints. 
I will keep it in mind, as one possibility, when next I design a class.

-- 
Niklas Holsti
Tidorum Ltd
niklas holsti tidorum fi
       .      @       .