Re:Rust and the Blub Paradox
by bluejekyll on Saturday January 23, 2016 @01:00PM
(#10959225)
Don't forget about how awesome C++'s multiple inheritance is! <sarcasm/>
edit: It's worth the down votes on this. Multiple inheritance is pure evil and confusion. In fact, even in Java I now rely on aggregation over inheritance.
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/269496/inheritance-vs-agg...
Unfortunately, in some languages, inheritance of abstract classes is the only way to get the equivalent of interfaces.
That said, yeah, the less class inheritance, the better. Ideally, work in a language where interfaces can include default implementations.
Re:Rust and the Blub Paradox
by bluejekyll on Saturday January 23, 2016 @04:22PM
(#10960149)
Totally, no problem with default implementations as long as they are generic. Java finally supports this, as well as Rust and others.
Re:Rust and the Blub Paradox
by GFK_of_xmaspast on Saturday January 23, 2016 @02:50PM
(#10959750)
c++ is a great language but a lot of the inheritance system is regrettable at best.
Additionally, the C++ example doesn't produce the same output ("Value: (x: 7)" and "Value: (x: 5, y: 10)"). The addition of that goal might lead the programmer to treat the C++ version of print_me as something more abstract, accepting a string and having class Foo and class Bar simply return their own string representations.
I acknowledge that the premise was "a beginner C++ developer", getting hyped up about inheritance and using it as the only tool in their toolbelt, but how many people are learning C++ as a first language these days? It used to be the norm, back in the OO-will-save-us-all heydey, but has anyone run into it lately?