Subject: Re: multiple inheritance
From: F J Franklin (F.J.Franklin@sheffield.ac.uk)
Date: Fri Oct 12 2001 - 04:51:04 CDT
> I come here a bit late, and I don't fully know all the technical details
> (so you should be doubly surprised if I'm right :)
>
> As I see it, IE_Imp_XML is a IE_Imp and uses a UT_XML (I'm guessing that
> UT_XML is some kind of xml reader with bells & whistles for help in the
> import task).
>
> So to me the right way to modelize that is:
>
> class IE_Imp_XML : public IE_Imp
> {
> private:
> UT_XML xmlParser;
> ...
> };
>
> btw, I though that we were not using MI not for lack of support in our
> compilers, but because it's hard to use right (for instance, I think
> that here you're showing an example of abuse of MI).
>
> Am I missing something?
Honestly? I don't know. Currently IE_Imp_XML provides (I think) an
abstract interface that descendants implement. All I'm suggesting is that
the interface should be defined in, say, UT_XML.
Ah, okay. Because UT_XML will be an abstract interface, it cannot be
instantiated which is why your suggestion is incompatible with mine.
What is MI for if not this?
Regards, Frank
ps. I'm no C++ expert. Please excuse me if my terminology is wrong.
Francis James Franklin
F.J.Franklin@shef.ac.uk
Deep in the human unconsciousness is a pervasive need for a logical
universe that makes sense. But the real universe is always one step
beyond logic.
--- from `The Sayings of Muad'dib' by the Princess Irulan
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Fri Oct 12 2001 - 04:51:09 CDT