Re: RfC: rethink OO inheritance strictness

Hello Richard, strict would meann a new keyword which most likely breaks a bunch of applications. It would be much easier to do: class Foo implements Strict { } and for the methods only stick with 'interface'. best regards marcus Monday, August 7, 2006, 8:29:09 PM, you wrote: > On Mon, August 7, 2006 8:25 am, Jeff Moore wrote: >> On Aug 4, 2006, at 3:23 AM, Derick Rethans wrote: >> >>> - Add a new flag to methods (at the implementation level) that will >>> allow to flag them as 'strict' >> >> Would exposing this flag to the user at method level get a bit verbose >> for those who want to use it? Perhaps a class level flag for all >> methods? Wasn't that proposed earlier? Its a long thread to follow, >> forgive me if I've missed something. > strict class blah blah blah { } > as shorthand for: > class blah blah blah { [strict function (){}]* } > doesn't seem like it would be too terribly difficult to implement or > understand... > Though 'strict' may not be the right keyword... > method_signature_match is a bit too verbose, though :-) > sigmatch ??? > 'strict' just has too many other potential meanings... > -- > Like Music? > http://l-i-e.com/artists.htm Best regards, Marcus