Version française
Home     About     Download     Resources     Contact us    

This site is updated infrequently. For up-to-date information, please visit the new OCaml website at

Browse thread
Smells like duck-typing
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: 2007-10-18 (10:37)
From: Stefano Zacchiroli <zack@b...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Smells like duck-typing
On Thu, Oct 18, 2007 at 11:31:34AM +0100, Dario Teixeira wrote:
> >   class full (id, title, intro, body) =
> >   object
> >           inherit blurb (id, title, intro)
> >           method body: string = body
> >   end
> While that would indeed involve a little bit of less typing, it's also
> conceptually wrong, because a Full story is not a derivation of a Blurb
> with an extra field.

Well, remember that in ocaml inheritance is not an instance of "is a"
relationship among classes, but rather "method inclusion" (if you really
want a name for this :)). So you can imagine that blurb (or call it
otherwise) is just a set of methods denoting how a blurb-like class
should behave, and here you have back the duck-typing mentioned in the
subject, and than you "inherit" from it both in the actual blurb class
and in the full class.

Just my 0.02€,

Stefano Zacchiroli -*- PhD in Computer Science ............... now what?
zack@{,,} -%-
(15:56:48)  Zack: e la demo dema ?    /\    All one has to do is hit the
(15:57:15)  Bac: no, la demo scema    \/    right keys at the right time