Re: JVM as UNCOL, was ANDF/TDF

fjh@cs.mu.OZ.AU (Fergus Henderson) schreibt:


>They didn't *have* to; they chose to do so, in order to get an initial
>version out sooner, not because implementing multiple inheritence was
>impossible, but rather because it was complicated.


I'm curious, because after a study of the usual implementation of
multiple inheritance I cannot find any real differences between single
and multiple inheritance. Instead I found that only some bad
definitions of e.g. constructor behaviour makes it impossible to use
e.g. C++ constructors properly, under many circumstances.


IMO multiple inheritance requires only, that the "this" and VMT
pointers are changed, when an object is casted to a base class. That's
the same procedure as when a single-inheritance object is casted to an
implemented interface, so - where is the problem?


DoDi

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.