From: Robert A Duff <bobduff@world.std.com>
Subject: Re: OO puzzle
Date: 1999/12/23
Date: 1999-12-23T00:00:00+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <wccr9gdaefw.fsf@world.std.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 83sqht$5oi$1@nnrp1.deja.com
Ehud Lamm <mslamm@mscc.huji.ac.il> writes:
> But than you lose the ability to define the abstract interface (for
> Motor_Vehicle) and know that it is supported by all descendants.
But it seems to me that you are *not* requiring the descendants to
support that interface. You are trying to let the descendants support a
different operation, also called "register", but with a different
contract (ie, trucks can't register airplane drivers, although the
parent type implied they could -- or whatever the example was).
It's an interesting language design issue, anyway.
- Bob
next prev parent reply other threads:[~1999-12-23 0:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1999-12-22 0:00 OO puzzle Ehud Lamm
1999-12-22 0:00 ` Jeff Carter
1999-12-22 0:00 ` Tucker Taft
1999-12-23 0:00 ` Ehud Lamm
1999-12-23 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1999-12-23 0:00 ` Ehud Lamm
1999-12-24 0:00 ` swhalen
1999-12-25 0:00 ` Ehud Lamm
1999-12-25 0:00 ` Ehud Lamm
1999-12-29 0:00 ` Brian Rogoff
1999-12-30 0:00 ` Jeffrey L Straszheim
1999-12-31 0:00 ` Brian Rogoff
1999-12-31 0:00 ` Jeffrey L Straszheim
2000-01-02 0:00 ` Brian Rogoff
2000-01-03 0:00 ` Matthew Heaney
1999-12-22 0:00 ` Ted Dennison
1999-12-23 0:00 ` Ehud Lamm
1999-12-23 0:00 ` Robert A Duff [this message]
1999-12-25 0:00 ` Ehud Lamm
1999-12-23 0:00 ` Ted Dennison
1999-12-25 0:00 ` Ehud Lamm
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox