From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,DNS_FROM_RFC_ABUSE, DNS_FROM_RFC_WHOIS autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3 X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.83]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2C49BBC69 for ; Thu, 18 Oct 2007 16:10:49 +0200 (CEST) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgAAADcGF0fOvjGsoWdsb2JhbACOTgIBAQIFBAYJCAEXgSc X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.21,295,1188770400"; d="scan'208";a="3228132" Received: from web54602.mail.re2.yahoo.com ([206.190.49.172]) by mail2-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with SMTP; 18 Oct 2007 16:10:47 +0200 Received: (qmail 31351 invoked by uid 60001); 18 Oct 2007 14:10:47 -0000 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-ID; b=Y3oQUgx+tMhf16G6Fjmu3oLKLkK8rAiFHxtwD2aHxqT6gl7Mv7fqOnlRo1xrFvSxMSx6ZpxOiNowRnwP/OluWs36J8STyQgLs8v03TP3IWMOfsp3Tqel29buOkPHX/8yYcFvI7VL8DgDJHgoL//rNkZE100vQepfTZSFulmVslM=; X-YMail-OSG: FuktWikVM1kpKLhKWgzvaKw0CHl8wjMeBYo1uFrch5X_JZCKjGrEauyYj3VQaebqD0PloIkvYv2GeOcRLIguR9b_VAnGlDF3uIKXBzCP6T6m3FNNPRycC309wW8a Received: from [82.155.125.49] by web54602.mail.re2.yahoo.com via HTTP; Thu, 18 Oct 2007 15:10:47 BST Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2007 15:10:47 +0100 (BST) From: Dario Teixeira Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Smells like duck-typing To: Robert Fischer Cc: Stefano Zacchiroli , caml-list@yquem.inria.fr In-Reply-To: <47175F96.9020007@fischerventure.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-ID: <377673.31302.qm@web54602.mail.re2.yahoo.com> X-Spam: no; 0.00; cheers:01 originated:98 caml-list:01 formalism:01 formalism:01 precisely:01 data:02 defined:02 seems:03 inheritance:03 inheritance:03 let:03 root:04 problem:05 problem:05 Hi, > That seems backwards from the way OO inheritance is supposed to work. > You don't go from a more feature-rich case to a less feature-rich case > -- it's the other way around. Of course it is -- that is precisely why inheritance is the wrong formalism for my problem! What I need is a "reverse inheritance" formalism, where a fully defined data structure sits at the root, and whose descendants are PRUNED versions of the parent. If sound (and I let the theoreticians decide on that), such a formalism would be an interesting solution to the type of problem that originated this thread. Cheers, Dario ___________________________________________________________ Yahoo! Answers - Got a question? Someone out there knows the answer. Try it now. http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/