Re: Object Class and Data Type

"Dan" <guntermannxxx_at_verizon.com> wrote in message news:Mtvac.7479$BE3.1948_at_nwrddc03.gnilink.net...

> I don't find the arguement convincing and I find it somewhat bothersome.
By
> your argument, any abstract or user-defined type is created to highlight
> differences in behavior (a la "type"). A class, on the other hand, is not
a
> type, and is only defined in terms of some hierarchy system, designed to
> highlight similarities across types. This would imply that a class is
> incapable of existing by itself, outside of some type system upon which to
> draw from and build upon (from another previously specified class) -

It would certainly imply that a class is of very limited value without a type system "to draw from and build upon". In fact, I believe that to be the case.

> entirely hierarchical by your account. Of course, this seems to
implicitly
> discount or even ignore multiple inheritance

I don't see that?

and lattice typing systems and
> a variety of other issues.
Received on Wed Mar 31 2004 - 17:38:01 CEST