From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id SAA02534; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 18:31:50 +0200 (MET DST)
X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f
Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id SAA02306 for <caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 18:31:49 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from postoffice.mail.cornell.edu (postoffice.mail.cornell.edu [132.236.56.7])
	by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.10.0) with ESMTP id f7NGVnX02455
	for <caml-list@inria.fr>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 18:31:49 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from milhouse.cs.cornell.edu.cs.cornell.edu (dhcp99-208.cs.cornell.edu [128.84.99.208])
	by postoffice.mail.cornell.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA25172
	for <caml-list@inria.fr>; Thu, 23 Aug 2001 12:31:47 -0400 (EDT)
To: caml-list@inria.fr
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Duplicate methods - bug or feature?
References: <yz1pu9m92jw.fsf@milhouse.cs.cornell.edu>
	<20010823182458.G1841@alan-schm1p>
From: Paul Stodghill <stodghil@cs.cornell.edu>
In-Reply-To: <20010823182458.G1841@alan-schm1p> (Alan Schmitt's message of "Thu, 23 Aug 2001 18:24:58 +0200")
Date: 23 Aug 2001 12:31:58 -0400
Message-ID: <yz1elq291q9.fsf@milhouse.cs.cornell.edu>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.090003 (Oort Gnus v0.03) XEmacs/21.4 (Academic Rigor)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr
Precedence: bulk

While I understand how this is handy in the case of multiple
inheritance, I don't see how this is useful when both methods are in the
same class. I think that if duplicates methods appear in a class, then
it is very likely to be an error. At a minimum, a warning should be
issues that the first method will be ignored.

I bring this up, because I just tracked down a bug in some of my own
code that resulted from two methods with the same name existing in the
same class. It was a "cut and paste" error on my part.

Thanks.


> You might consider it a feature, due to multiple inheritance. IIRC, when
> a class inherits from two classes which define the same method name, the
> last one wins.
> 
> Alan Schmitt
> 
> * Paul Stodghill (stodghil@cs.cornell.edu) wrote:
> > Is it a bug or feature that a class can contain two methods with the
> > same name? Thanks.
> > 
> > milhouse$ uname -a
> > CYGWIN_NT-5.0 MILHOUSE 1.3.2(0.39/3/2) 2001-05-20 23:28 i686 unknown
> > milhouse$ ocamlc -v
> > The Objective Caml compiler, version 3.02
> > Standard library directory: /usr/local/lib/ocaml
> > milhouse$ 
> > milhouse$ 
> > milhouse$ cat double_method.ml 
> > class a =
> > object
> >   method m = "a.m1"
> >   method m = "a.m2"
> > end
> > ;;
> > 
> > let _ =
> >   let x = new a in
> >     Printf.printf "x=%s\n" x#m;
> >     ()
> > ;;
> > 
> > milhouse$ 
> > milhouse$ 
> > milhouse$ ocamlc -o double_method.exe double_method.ml 
> > milhouse$ ./double_method.exe 
> > x=a.m2
> > milhouse$ 
> > 
> > -------------------
> > Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs  FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
> > To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr  Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
> 
> 
> --
> The hacker: someone who figured things out and made something cool happen.

-------------------
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs  FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr  Archives: http://caml.inria.fr