[DGD] data inheritance: multiple vs single ancestry

[Raymond Jennings]

...that was random.

On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 7:22 PM, Stephen Spiller <steve_spiller at msn.com> wrote:
> I like pie.
>
>> From: shentino at gmail.com
>> Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2013 18:54:41 -0700
>> To: dgd at dworkin.nl
>> Subject: Re: [DGD] data inheritance: multiple vs single ancestry
>>
>> Ewww...
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 6:53 PM, Kent Mein <mein at cs.umn.edu> wrote:
>> >
>> > On Mar 21, 2013, at 8:40 PM, Raymond Jennings <shentino at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Ok, just curious about this:
>> >>
>> >> Phantasmal has "archetypes" where properties and things can be
>> >> inherited from multiple ancestors.  In some cases, the prime ancestor
>> >> (first on the list) is used for stuff that can't be aggregated,
>> >> whereas things like nouns and adjectives can be inherited from every
>> >> parent.
>> >>
>> >> However, SkotOS as you know has only a single "ur (you are)" pointer
>> >> and data inheritance is forcibly singular.
>> >>
>> >> Is it better to allow multiple ancestry, or are things better off with
>> >> the simple model where you can only have one parent?
>> >
>> >
>> > I don't know if there is an absolute answer to your question.  I prefer to
>> > keep things simple.  Otherwise you wind up with stuff like this:
>> >
>> > http://www-users.cs.umn.edu/~mein/dgd/objects.png
>> >
>> > gurbalib's current basic objects and inheritance….
>> >
>> > It can easily get out of control.  Having said all of that, I think it's useful if used
>> > in the right way.
>> >
>> > Kent
>> > ____________________________________________
>> > https://mail.dworkin.nl/mailman/listinfo/dgd
>> ____________________________________________
>> https://mail.dworkin.nl/mailman/listinfo/dgd
>
> ____________________________________________
> https://mail.dworkin.nl/mailman/listinfo/dgd