• Kache@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    inheritance to avoid code duplication

    What no, inheritance is not for code sharing

    Sound bite aside, inheritance is a higher level concept. That it “shares code” is one of several effects.

    The simple, plain, decoupled way to share code is the humble function call, i.e. static method in certain langs.

    • lad
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      29 days ago

      I mostly come to prefer composition, this approach apparently even has a wiki page. But that’s in part because I use Rust that forbids inheritance, and don’t have such bullshit (from delegation wiki page):

      class A {
          void foo() {
              // "this" also known under the names "current", "me" and "self" in other languages
              this.bar();
          }
      
          void bar() {
              print("a.bar");
          }
      }
      
      class B {
          private delegate A a; // delegation link
      
          public B(A a) {
              this.a = a;
          }
      
          void foo() {
              a.foo(); // call foo() on the a-instance
          }
      
          void bar() {
              print("b.bar");
          }
      }
      
      a = new A();
      b = new B(a); // establish delegation between two objects
      

      Calling b.foo() will result in b.bar being printed, since this refers to the original receiver object, b, within the context of a. The resulting ambiguity of this is referred to as object schizophrenia

      Translating the implicit this into an explicit parameter, the call (in B, with a a delegate) a.foo() translates to A.foo(b), using the type of a for method resolution, but the delegating object b for the this argument.

      Why would one substitute b as this when called from b.a is beyond me, seriously.