Browse thread
Smells like duck-typing
[
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 09:58:50 -0500, Robert Fischer wrote > If you think that a full story as a story with a summary/header, > and also a body, then you're conceptually into inheritance. > > From a formal standpoint, you're saying that all full stories > can be treated as headers/summaries/"blurbs", but not all > headers/summary/"blurbs" can be treated as full stories. > This is equivalent to saying that full stories are a subtype > of header/summaries/"blurbs". Well, I think the problem here is that the mental model is reversed with respect to the functional model. Mentally, blurbs are kinds of stories -- they are distinguished by their lack of a body. Using the standard inheritance lingo, however, stories are a kind of blurb -- distinguished by the inclusion of a body. Really, it seems like we've got a six of one/half- dozen of the other situation... -- William D. Neumann