On Thu, 2006-04-27 at 14:42 +0200, Pierre THIERRY wrote: > Scribit Marcus Brinkmann dies 27/04/2006 hora 14:24: > > However, more importantly, I don't know what you mean by wrapper > > object. We want to limit ourselves to single inheritence. > > I think I was thinking to something that cannot be achieved with single > inheritance, in fact... That is, an object that could mutate its > interface to add (or remove) methods when it is brougth the associated > capabilities. I think this isn't possible in Coyotos, is it?
If the object you are referring to is implemented by a process, then PLEASE do not call it a "wrapper". The term "wrapper" is already taken. > I'm not sure. How many times in a classical software are you needing two > or more access modes to something? Almost universally. In practice, write almost always implies read. The bits may be separate, but the usage pattern is that 'w' implies 'r'. shap _______________________________________________ L4-hurd mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/l4-hurd
