[4415] in java-interest
MI and Parameterized Types (was Re: interfaces)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (David Geary)
Fri Dec 22 13:53:08 1995
Date: Fri, 22 Dec 1995 10:08:21 -0700
From: David.Geary@Central.Sun.COM (David Geary)
To: arnold@suneast.East.Sun.COM, satoo@pfu.fujitsu.co.jp
Cc: java-interest@webrunner.neato.org
> > A purely abstract class (one that has *only* abstract methods) is hard
> > to distinguish from an interface, but if that's what you're producing,
> > you should produce an interface instead.
The implication, of course, is that a class can implement more than one
interface, but can only extend one class.
> It may cause collisions of implementations in class name
> space. It's most common problem of multi-inheritance, I
> think. That's why java doesn't have such features, right?
Personally, I believe the evils of MI are overrated. I routinely use MI in
C++, and never run into problems.
Multiple inheritance and parameterized types are very powerful tools which
are almost a necessity in a statically typed OO language which delivers
polymorphism only via inheritance. I find their absence from Java most
limiting.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
David Geary "Peaches come in a can
geary@rmtc.Central.Sun.COM They were put there by a man"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-
This message was sent to the java-interest mailing list
Info: send 'help' to java-interest-request@java.sun.com
