On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 19:42:20 -0000, Jens <j...@somewhere.org> wrote:
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 15:28:09 -0400, Jens <j...@somewhere.org> wrote:
Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 14:54:13 -0400, Jens <j...@somewhere.org> wrote:
I didn't ask how to do composition in D. I asked why composition
cannot be done via derivation, i.e., the reasoning behind the
language design choice. A design faux paus IMO.
Because composition by inheritance can be *completely* implemented
using alias this -- a feature that also provides other niceties. Why
provide another mechanism to do the exact same thing, just
because you are used to it?
1. I'm not convinced the other functionality is necessary.
2. I eschew ugly syntax.
Beauty is subjective, so I guess I can say at this point, go write
your own language that is beautiful in your mind. Good luck.
I am. Thanks.
Note that "inheritance" is actually done exactly this way in C++, by
putting the derived type at the front of the "derived" type, and
aliasing all the methods/fields into the derived namespace.
Show me what composition by derivation provides that alias this does
not.
Nice syntax.
So in other words, you want an aqua-blue bikeshed, when D's is just
blue.
This will be my last reply to this thread...
Aww, little boy didn't get his way and is going home to cry to mommy.
Grow up. Steven has done the adult thing and realised your difference of
opinion is based solely on personal preference, and therefore any argument
on his part is futile. You, on the other hand, have resorted to personal
attacks.. a logical fallacy which typically means lack of self control
and/or no valid rebuttal to the actual argument. Way to go.
--
Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
