Subject: Re: multiple inheritance
From: Joaquin Cuenca Abela (cuenca@pacaterie.u-psud.fr)
Date: Fri Oct 12 2001 - 05:10:52 CDT
F J Franklin wrote:
>>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.
yes, I was missing something, I didn't know that UT_XML is an interface.
> What is MI for if not this?
Sadly enough, sometimes you need to multi-inherite implementation and
not only interfaces.
Last time I was in such a situation was one year ago, when I had to
implement an object that should be shared by two different third
libraries (and each library was expecting an object derived of his own abc).
For the record, it was in java, and for first time I missed MI of
implementations.
Cheers,
-- Joaquin Cuenca Abela cuenca@pacaterie.u-psud.fr
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Fri Oct 12 2001 - 05:09:52 CDT