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=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: fac41,c52c30d32b866eae X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,2ea02452876a15e1 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,c52c30d32b866eae X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public From: donh@syd.csa.com.au (Don Harrison) Subject: Re: Real OO Date: 1996/05/10 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 154057050 sender: news@assip.csasyd.oz references: organization: CSC Australia reply-to: donh@syd.csa.com.au newsgroups: comp.lang.eiffel,comp.lang.ada,comp.object Date: 1996-05-10T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Bob Duff writes: :In article , :Don Harrison wrote: :>Comments? Do you love it? Hate it? Don't care? : :At first glance, it seems like a lot of added complexity, for not enough :benefit. Thinking some more about multiple dispatching, I'm rapidly coming to the conclusion that it's not such a good idea. Single dispatching seems to maximise the power of polymorphism because the same code can be executed for a multitude of different conformant objects. I guess this is sufficient for the vast majority of modelling tasks. While there are situations where a unique action must be taken for each specific combination of parameters, these would be uncommon and typically represent esoteric situations which may be dealt with using non-OO techniques. If you mean that multiple dispatching is unnecessary overkill, I agree. :- Bob /// Don. (o o) =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=oOO=-(_)-=OOo=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Don Harrison donh@syd.csa.com.au