Hi,
On Fri, 19 Sep 2003, Aleksandar Donev wrote:
> I disagree. In most situations I can think of you would like to use multiple
> inheritance in such a situation and the answer is "there should be one shared
> grandparent component. But I am sure some will argue that they need to have
> two different components...
Yeah ok. It would be nice but I don't know how much effort it would be
for compiler vendors and the standards guys. The main reason I was saying
that we could have multiple parents while disallowing common grandparents
is that it is a reasonably trivial change to the standard. As David said,
this may not be multiple inheritance, but it's a lot more useful than what
the draft has now.
> Daniel, there is no need to convince me. I am perfectly on your side. The
> decisions on what was to go into OOP in Fortran were made long before I
> started work on it...Why did you not comment on F2003 during public comment
> period and complain about it?
I'm largely still on the learning curve for OO features to languages, and
wasn't up to the task a year or so ago :(. I'm just a couple of years too
young for this standard....
Regards,
Daniel.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Daniel Grimwood Department of Chemistry
Email : [log in to unmask] The University of Western Australia
Phone : +61 8 93808563 35 Stirling Highway
Fax : +61 8 93801005 Crawley WA 6009
|