From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <bhurt@janestcapital.com>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=disabled 
	version=3.1.3
X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr
Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr
Received: from mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail1-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.82])
	by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DC0ABC69
	for <caml-list@yquem.inria.fr>; Thu, 18 Oct 2007 18:43:12 +0200 (CEST)
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Ao8CAN4pF0dCm3xr/2dsb2JhbACQMg
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.21,296,1188770400"; 
   d="scan'208";a="3218708"
Received: from janestcapital.com (HELO smtp.janestcapital.com) ([66.155.124.107])
  by mail1-smtp-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 18 Oct 2007 18:43:11 +0200
Received: from [172.25.129.161] [38.96.172.125] by janestcapital.com with ESMTP
  (SMTPD-9.10) id AD1E0898; Thu, 18 Oct 2007 12:43:10 -0400
Message-ID: <47178D1E.5050409@janestcapital.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2007 12:43:10 -0400
From: Brian Hurt <bhurt@janestcapital.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.2 (ax)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Dario Teixeira <darioteixeira@yahoo.com>
Cc: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Smells like duck-typing
References: <939878.37106.qm@web54604.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
In-Reply-To: <939878.37106.qm@web54604.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam: no; 0.00; marble:98 marble:98 wrote:01 caml-list:01 int:01 defined:02 defined:02 chunk:02 string:02 string:02 suggestion:03 inheritance:03 inheritance:03 let:03 let:03 

Dario Teixeira wrote:

>Hi,
>
>(This is a collective reply to all the issues that were raised by my
>previous message; sorry if I don't answer each message individually).
>
>I made the early "reverse inheritance" suggestion somewhat facetiously,
>but judging from the replies, there was a certain amount of confusion
>about what I meant.
>
>I'll try to describe what I have in mind.  I'll do it by modelling
>the problem in an imaginary OCaml-derived language that features
>"reverse inheritance".  Please read on:
>
>
>The "story" class is one that is fully defined.  Think of it as a raw
>block of marble from which the non-important pieces can be carved out.
>To avoid confusion, let's call a class of this kind a "marble-class":
>
>marble-class story (id, title, intro, body) =
>object
>	method id: int = id
>	method title: string = title
>	method intro: string = intro
>	method body: string = body
>end
>
>Now, a "full_story" is one that is also fully defined.  Taking as starting
>point the "story" block-class previously defined, you don't need to carve
>out anything to obtain a full_story:
>
>marble-class full_story (id, title, intro, body) =
>object
>	carves story (id, title, intro, body)
>end
>
>
>However, a "blurb_story" does introduce changes: it can be formed by
>taking the original story as a starting point, and removing the "body"
>chunk of marble.  Note that I am using some new keywords: carves, removes,
>and CARVED:
>
>marble-class blurb_story (id, title, intro) =
>object
>	carves story (id, title, intro, CARVED)
>	removes method body
>end
>
>
>Similarly, a "fresh_story" is a story without the "id" field:
>
>marble-class fresh_story (title, intro, body)
>object
>	carves story (CARVED, title, intro, body)
>	removes method id
>end
>
>  
>

So now you've defined full_story, blurb_story, and fresh_story as 
types.  Now, I write:

let get_body (story: full_story) = story#get_body;;

let my_blurb = new blurb_story(id, "A Title", "An Intro");;

let my_body = get_body my_blurb;;

what happens?

Brian