cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefano Mazzocchi <>
Subject Re: [RT] composition vs. inheritance in blocks
Date Wed, 30 Mar 2005 00:08:31 GMT
Daniel Fagerstrom wrote:

damn, hit sent too early.

>> If you *don't* care for reusability, then it's true that multiple 
>> implementation inheritnace can serve as a cheaper form of composition.
> For the majority of Cocoon users I would assume that blocks that are 
> possible to extend and override is easier to reuse (considered that they 
> have a good design of course), than just a lump of components and 
> stylesheets.

what the hell are you talking about? the problem on the table is 
multiple inheritance, not how granular the services the blocks offer are.

There is *NOTHING* that indicates that if you had MI or not the blocks 
will be more or less granular.

>> But if I had to pick between improving block reusability or ease of 
>> composition, I would go with the first, hoping that tools/syntax-sugar 
>> would help the second (as it happened with Java).
> It's not either or. It's not exactly rocket science to build a mechanism 
> for mutiple inheritance so we can have booth.

> We just need to discuss what we want to achieve and how to achive it to 
> get it right.

I consider multiple inheritance for blocks FS: YAGNI!

Show me *one* example where single inheritance and multiple interface 
composition can't echieve what you want to achieve and I'll change my 
mind, but until then I'm stongly -1 on MI for blocks.


View raw message