Browse thread
Smells like duck-typing
-
Dario Teixeira
- Arnaud Spiwack
- Daniel_Bünzli
- Chris King
- Zheng Li
- Vincent Aravantinos
- Richard Jones
- Dario Teixeira
- Vincent Aravantinos
[
Home
]
[ Index:
by date
|
by threads
]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
| Date: | -- (:) |
| From: | William D. Neumann <wneumann@c...> |
| Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] Smells like duck-typing |
On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 17:47:45 +0200, Loup Vaillant wrote > It feels like the problem is the keyword "inherit". It suggest > C++/Java subtyping, while we just want code reuse. If having stories > inheriting from one another eventually result in less code, I would > consider that cleaner, no matter what "inherit" is supposed to mean. > > Sometimes, a tool can be good at something it has not be designed > for. I think this might be the case, here. Oh, I absolutely agree there. And there are a couple of important snippets of the manual that seem to apply: "Note that the relation between object, class and type in Objective Caml is very different from that in main stream object-oriented languages like Java or C++, so that you should not assume that similar keywords mean the same thing." and "Inheritance is a syntactic relation between classes..." -- William D. Neumann