[Uml-devel] ambiguity

[Andrew Sutton]

On Thursday 16 January 2003 1:04 am, P. Fleury wrote:
> Andrew Sutton wrote:
> >i have a sneaking suspicion that implementing everything in the base
> > classes would be a) a little less confusing and b) more efficient - no
> > traversal of inheritance chains for virtual functions.
>
> Just a note: the traversal of inheritance chains is a compile-time
> issue. Runtime, it is the same overhead for a virtual function going
> down 1 level of inheritance or 100, as it will be a function pointer
> table lookup.

no... i was talking about run-time traversal. you know, with explicit calls to 
base classes.

> >what do you think? interfaces and a few implementations or virtual
> >inheritance?
>
> I'm very biased, but I'd go the Java way: interfaces and a few
> implementations. It makes the functionality of a class clearer, and
> avoids all the pitfalls.

i'm starting to think the same way. its unfortunate, because i've already 
written so much code. oh well. back to the drawing board :)

andy