On Fri, 2003-03-07 at 05:14, Omer Zak wrote: > On 6 Mar 2003, William Lachance wrote: > > > Remove an unnecessary marshaller class through the miracle of multiple > > inheritance. Less code, less bugs. The classes I'm aggregrating are > > completely orthogonal: please forward your complaints about the use of > > MI to /dev/null/. > > Actually, one kind of multiple inheritance is (or should be) trouble-free, > and is used in a software development framework, which generally frowns on > multiple inheritance (Symbian OS, used in some cellular phones). > > This special kind has the restriction that out of all parent classes from > which a given class multiply-inherits, only one parent class may declare > variables and/or non-virtual functions. All other parent classes are > allowed to declare only virtual functions. > > Thus, the extra parent classes are no more than the equivalent of Java's > interfaces. > > If William Lachance's multiply-inheriting classes conform to this > restriction, I see no problem with allowing this. > If not, then it should not be too difficult to restructure the classes to > conform to this restriction.
WPXHLListenerImpl (one of the classes in the join) is a class which is just a collection of virtual functions. This is not likely to change. For those curious, please see this link: http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lite/multiple-inheritance.html -- William Lachance <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
