(responding to Biniam Tesfu)
> Is it possible/allowed to apply "multiplicity" on an > inheritance relationship? Or, I should never have > multiplicy on inheritance relationship? I take it you are talking about a generalises/specialises relationship, a.k.a. 'Is-A' or Inheritance relationship. I find it hard to envisage _why_ you would want multiplicity other than one on this. Are you trying to model a 'composition' relationship? It is in fact possible in some languages to inherit from the same class twice or more, but I've never seen this happen without intervening classes in the hierarchy. C++ allows 'virtual' inheritance to be specified, to deal with some of the issues this would raise. In summary, I'd be very suspicious about any wish to place a multiplicity other than 1 on the Inheritance relationship. I'm sure that's not what you really want to do. I'd be interested if anyone could give valid counter- examples. Paul Oldfield any opinions expressed herein are not necessarily those of Mentors of Cally ************************************************************************ * Rose Forum is a public venue for ideas and discussions. * For technical support, visit http://www.rational.com/support * * Post or Reply to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Subscription Requests: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Archive of messages: * http://www.rational.com/support/usergroups/rose/rose_forum.jsp * Other Requests: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * * To unsubscribe from the list, please send email * To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * Subject: <BLANK> * Body: unsubscribe rose_forum *************************************************************************
