Re: Ready to add dlw_oprs.zip?

From: Daryle Walker (darylew_at_[hidden])
Date: 2000-12-23 19:35:53

on 12/20/00 8:09 AM, David Abrahams at abrahams_at_[hidden] wrote:

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Daryle Walker" <darylew_at_[hidden]>
>> Was there anything in the documentation to give the impression of (standard)
>> multiple inheritance?

> No; it's just that I knew what  your original motivation for doing the
> grouping was, and I assumed that part of the answer would have to involve
> going back to MI.

OK.  In the latest version of "dlw_oprs.zip" (17), I explain better how the
groupings are done.

>> I'm not sure that the inheritance 'breaks' solve the over-nesting problem
>> that prompted me to make the grouped templates.  The chaining was too long
>> when I tried to incorporate my new single templates to the operatorsX stuff,
>> but I've never gone back to try incorporation again using the group system!

> That would be worth trying. And if it fixes the problem, you ought to make a
> note in the docs about it.

It did work!  But I forgot to add anything to the docs.  (And I didn't
change the operatorsX class templates permanently, anyway.)

> P.S. Thank you for being so responsive to criticism on these changes. I
> guess library maintenance (and especially growing a library well) is hard!

Yeah...

-- 
Daryle Walker
Mac, Internet, and Video Game Junkie
darylew AT mac DOT com