Re: Mixins vs. Class helpers

Craig Stuntz [TeamB] wrote:
m. Th. wrote:

Are you trying to say that adding 'virtual/dynamic/reintroduce'
methods to OOP was a mistake? Imho, these features are specially made
to allow overriding. Or perhaps I'm missing something?

No, it's just that your first example was not nearly as clear as your
more recent one.


Yes, my fault. I owe you my apologies :-)

All good wishes,

--

m. th.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Mixins vs. Class helpers
    ... methods to OOP was a mistake? ... these features are specially made ... to allow overriding. ... Or perhaps I'm missing something? ...
    (borland.public.delphi.non-technical)
  • Re: Mixins vs. Class helpers
    ... functionality, as with class helpers. ... these features are specially made to allow overriding. ... And besides that, mixins aren't only about overriding, it's about also adding a consistent behavior in a handy way to certain classes. ...
    (borland.public.delphi.non-technical)
  • Re: one-liner for characater replacement
    ... I think the concept of KIND was a mistake. ... And bit strings. ... simply turn the language into a "typeless' one.) ... popular language features. ...
    (comp.lang.fortran)
  • Re: Randy vs. Betov: from an outsider
    ... you are missing a lot actually. ... >> Anything wrong with the original Caret Management? ... > -no block selection features like comment/uncomment, ...
    (alt.lang.asm)
  • Re: iphone features
    ... damn, the iphone obviously has some cool features, but it's seriously missing some features! ... 1- no voice dialing on a phone w/ no tactile feedback? ... with all the hype, the iphone is practically guranteed to be successful, but damn, it sure seems to have some serious shortcomings... ...
    (comp.sys.mac.advocacy)