Ralf Hemmecke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| Dear William,
|
| On 03/04/2006 05:31 PM, William Sit wrote:
| > Hi Gabe:
| > Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
| >> William Sit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
|
| > Agreed in theory, not in practice. We should distinguish two issues: (1)
| > derived operations that depend only on the defining operations should be
| > generically implemented and inherited, and (2) how to handle the notations
| > (equivalently, identifiers in computer science terminology) for the defining
| > operations and derived operations.
|
| By (1) you probably mean to say something like
|
| define PrimitiveType: Category == with {
| =: (%, %) -> Boolean;
| ~=: (%, %) -> Boolean;
| default { (a:%) ~= (b:%):Boolean == ~(a = b); }
| }
|
| I must say that I liked this idea of "default implementations" when
| I've encountered it. But it also introduces all the complications with
| multiple inheritance.
Inheritance usually does not mary well with genericity, despite the
usual OO propaganda. :-(
-- Gaby
_______________________________________________
Axiom-developer mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/axiom-developer
