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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,1116ece181be1aea
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-09-11 21:03:45 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!headwall.stanford.edu!newshub.sdsu.edu!elnk-nf2-pas!newsfeed.earthlink.net!wn14feed!worldnet.att.net!204.127.198.203!attbi_feed3!attbi_feed4!attbi.com!rwcrnsc53.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: tmoran@acm.org
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Is the Writing on the Wall for Ada?
References: <eh78b.7499$ej1.4404@nwrdny01.gnilink.net>
X-Newsreader: Tom's custom newsreader
Message-ID: <AAb8b.320778$cF.97371@rwcrnsc53>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.234.4.127
X-Complaints-To: abuse@comcast.net
X-Trace: rwcrnsc53 1063339424 12.234.4.127 (Fri, 12 Sep 2003 04:03:44 GMT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 04:03:44 GMT
Organization: Comcast Online
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 04:03:44 GMT
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:42399
Date: 2003-09-12T04:03:44+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

> > that demonstrates that MI does not work in general.
>... this is a counterexample to the notion that
>multiple inheritance from some set of bases is useful.
  "work in general" can mean, and I think was intended to mean, "work in
all cases", and clearly a single counterexample disproves that.  "work in
general" could also take a less formal meaning of "work most of the time",
and I suspect that's the way Hyman took it.  In that interpretation of
course, the statement is not disproved by a single counterexample.