Do you think multiple inheritence is a good thing or is it useless?
Printable View
Do you think multiple inheritence is a good thing or is it useless?
New to C++? Of course it's not useless, bonehead. But yeah, don't overuse it if possible. It can lead to a very bad framework if you let it get out of hand. Mostly single-purpose classes are inherited that way actually.
Multiple inheritence is good so long as you don't get carried away with it (it can create overhead).
>> New to C++?
Uh, NO! I was just wondering last night what others thought about it
I don't find it to be such a retarded question. It is one of those things that you could easily make programs without using.
It's said that Barne Starjodsodiufskdfjwlkefjwoijfiwejflkjasdkjfl~~~~
the creator of C++ didn't like multiple inheritance and only put it in after the ATT board made him.
How could they make him? It was his languageQuote:
Originally posted by OneStiffRod
It's said that Barne Starjodsodiufskdfjwlkefjwoijfiwejflkjasdkjfl~~~~
the creator of C++ didn't like multiple inheritance and only put it in after the ATT board made him.
AT&T was the technical owner of the lang. since he worked for them when he developed it - it was ATT who encouraged it's release to the public and helped him develop it to that point - he is known as a "FELLOW" at ATT along with his counterparts who run the research and science board for ATT.
>New to C++? Of course it's not useless, bonehead.
I think that's a little harsh. There's has been a debate raging for many years as to whether multiple inheritance is a good thing or not. Other languages get by without it, i.e. Java & Object Pascal. Instead they have a notion of inheriting interfaces.
Having said this, there has been one occasion where I've needed multiple inheretance, and nothing else would have done. But such cases are very rare. Normally you should try to avoid using it, unless you have to, or it really makes sense in the architecture of your project. For example, CORBA makes significant use of multiple inheritance.
Ok, and, uh...why would AT&T force him to put it in? Why was it so important to them?Quote:
Originally posted by OneStiffRod
AT&T was the technical owner of the lang. since he worked for them when he developed it - it was ATT who encouraged it's release to the public and helped him develop it to that point - he is known as a "FELLOW" at ATT along with his counterparts who run the research and science board for ATT.
I highly doubt that. I've never seen any valid source that makes even the slightest allussion to such a thing, not even in Stroustrups's own books.Quote:
Originally posted by OneStiffRod
It's said that Barne Starjodsodiufskdfjwlkefjwoijfiwejflkjasdkjfl~~~~
the creator of C++ didn't like multiple inheritance and only put it in after the ATT board made him.
What it comes down to is that multiple inheritance is a powerful tool and does have its uses. Combining implementation is really all that I've used it for. It usually doesn't go very well with polymorphism on many bases simply because the resultant class's instances taking up quite a bit more space than you'd probably want, especially with virtual bases (in most implementations of C++, that is). I only used it once in that manner, but came up with another design for that very reason. While its use with polymorphism and virtual bases is great on a design level, in implementation it will most-likely cause your objects to take up a lot more space in memory. Of course, if you aren't concerned about space, or if there aren't many instances of the class, then it's a perfectly fine thing to do.
What I usually use it for (and still, I personnaly don't use it an extreme amount) is IE for
A class Vertex
A class ColorPacket
A class TextureCoordinatePacket
A derived class ColoredVertex inheritted from both Vertex and ColorPacket
A derived class TexturedVertex inheritted from both Vertex and TextureCoordinatePacket
A derived class ColoredTexturedVertex inheritted from Vertex, ColorPacket, and TextureCoordinatePacket
All non-virtual, public inheritance
ColorPacket and TextureCoordinatePacket both have member functions and data that I wish to use in a "kind of" vertex. With aggregation one would have to make functions that would call the members' functions. It's a hassle. Instead, multiple inheritance is used not to make the resultant classes "kinds of" ColorPackets or "kinds of" TextureCoordinatePackets, but are used just as ways of combining the implementations.
You can read more about C++ language here:
The Design and Evolution of C++
;)
>>>
1) Provides insights into the aims, principles, and real-world constraints which shaped C++,
2) Describes design decisions for individual language features,
3) Shows the relationships between C++ language features and the design and programming techniques supported by C++,
4) Discusses the design of the latest language features: templates, exceptions, run-time type information, and namespaces.
Why bother, I've got a copy of the book right here :p
I got my info from an article written way back in 1994 - I found it on the internet a few months ago - if you look for it I'm sure you'll find it.
Also, that book will probably tell you the same thing, there are features of C++ that the creator was not too fond of including but the committee insisted.
Doesn't say anything like that -- in fact, he just talks about how useful it is.
Here's another tid-bit by Stroustrup specifically about the benefits of Multiple Inheritance.
http://www.cs.colorado.edu/~diwan/class-papers/mi.pdf