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-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,1592759aa83d0d45
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-06-01 02:16:27 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!headwall.stanford.edu!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!dialin-145-254-039-218.arcor-ip.NET!not-for-mail
From: "Dmitry A. Kazakov" <mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: MI in Ada 200X
Date: Sun, 01 Jun 2003 11:18:52 +0200
Organization: At home
Message-ID: <bbcg99$7u9v9$1@ID-77047.news.dfncis.de>
References: <0Pxza.699607$OV.652508@rwcrnsc54>
 <4a4de33a.0305280557.5d5aba37@posting.google.com>
 <slrnbd9k0c.a0q.randhol+abuse@kiuk0152.chembio.ntnu.no>
 <bb4j31$5juvr$6@ID-77047.news.dfncis.de>
 <T7adnSyjD8FPW0ujXTWcow@gbronline.com>
 <bb71lu$6gbf6$2@ID-77047.news.dfncis.de> <b0IBa.494$78.11159@news.siol.net>
 <bb9sdg$78a8t$2@ID-77047.news.dfncis.de>
 <1249705.nbiPLfKFDK@linux1.krischik.com>
Reply-To: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de
NNTP-Posting-Host: dialin-145-254-039-218.arcor-ip.net (145.254.39.218)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
X-Trace: fu-berlin.de 1054458986 8333289 145.254.39.218 (16 [77047])
User-Agent: KNode/0.7.1
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:38275
Date: 2003-06-01T11:18:52+02:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Martin Krischik wrote:

> Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
> 
>> Karel Miklav wrote:
>> 
>>> Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
> 
>>> I don't see how this is related to MI. What do you think about the
>>> diamond problem and other evils of MI?
>> 
>> Incest? A bad thing, you know. However, I would not call a problem
>> anything that can be detected at compile-time. --
> 
> The Problem is not detecting it. The problem is alowing it. Even in real
> live it is eventualy allowed (usualy from 2nd level cousins onwards). If
> you don't allow it you will sooner or later run into real limitations -
> beeing unable to combine just the right parents to form just the right
> child.

I cannot follow whether you are pro or contra. (:-)) Anyway, if a problem is 
detectable it can be solved. Inheritance through several paths (diamond) is 
not a problem but a case. Both variants of its interpretation has a place:

1. When objects have some reference count for garbage collection then one 
might wish only one instance of the count inherited.

2. When objects are derived from some list element, it is better to keep the 
instances separate to let the object be member of several lists.

-- 
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
www.dmitry-kazakov.de