From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <df49a7370708220422v25418350v617c024d373ba643@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 12:22:49 +0100
From: "roger peppe" <rogpeppe@gmail.com>
To: "Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs" <9fans@cse.psu.edu>
Subject: Re: [9fans] Re: everything is a directory
In-Reply-To: <1187776240.695036.278770@x40g2000prg.googlegroups.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <5d375e920708201825r44ea34f3m7500c4760db7024f@mail.gmail.com>
	<1187776240.695036.278770@x40g2000prg.googlegroups.com>
Topicbox-Message-UUID: afd99d8a-ead2-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

> Don't you agree that the semantics are roughly the same as in
> classical OO, even though the syntax, type checking and run-time vs.
> compile-time trade offs are different?

no, union binding in plan 9 does not really give inheritance
semantics in general. for some cases it can (e.g. /net), but usually when
it's already been anticipated. try combining two instances of upas/fs,
for example.

to me, it seems more like the C library system than an object inheritance
system - you can combine and override elements, but not much else.