Re: Multiple Inheritance

It might appear to be overkill until the next poor sap comes along and 
says - Gee, I would like to change the behavior of Foo and then realizes 
that if he changes Foo he breaks everything else because it's so 
inter-linked.  I realize that single inheritance, delegation may not 
make life easier on the creator, but may make life easier on the poor 
schlub that tries to change functionality when the creator is long 
gone.  I written lots of code (over 30 years) and it's always the 
maintenance that's the most expensive, not the creation.  I don't know 
how many times I've seen software abandoned or re-written because it was 
so complex that the developer cannot understand it and therefore is too 
scared to  change it.  My philosophy has always been - "keep is simple". 
If I kept it simple, it survived for years - thereby saving the company 
a lot of money.

-- 

Brad Selfridge

On 6/7/2012 3:47 PM, andre wrote:
> Am 07.06.2012 um 20:40 schrieb Brad Selfridge:
>
>> It seems to me that the example you provided should be implemented in several classes that is wrapped in an
manager class.  Not sure MI is the best solution in this instance.
> Yep, one can do that, but it would require all those "several" classes to be subclassed each, because they
would have to share a common state with the manager and provide special methods&  patterns to do so:
>
> - Subclass the "Thread" thing
>
> - Subclass the "Job Queue" thing
>
> - Subclass the "Broacast" thing
>
> - Subclass the "Server" thing
>
> - Subclass the "OS Events" thing
>
> - Create a "Manager" class that includes instances of all the above.
>
> - Write a lot of code that makes all these objects communicate with each other in order to share a common state.
>
> IMO, that's pretty overkill compared to just clicking LEGO blocks together with MI. Chances are also high
that some of the objects may include redundant state information that needs to be synchronized. MI would
merge them.
>
> This is really a fundamental problem for which there is no perfect solution. At the end of the day, OO is only
an approximation anyway.
>
> Andre
>
>