Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!ames!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!unmvax!ncar!boulder!pikes!udenva!isis!mmartin
From: mmartin@isis.UUCP (Mike Martin)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.eiffel
Subject: redefinition and renaming
Keywords: redefinition, renaming, dynamic binding
Message-ID: <2431@isis.UUCP>
Date: 28 Feb 89 22:26:57 GMT
Organization: University of Denver, Math/CS
Lines: 22

I am having difficulty understanding Figure 11.1, p. 260, in the second
printing of Meyer's book.  

It seems to me that there is an inconsistency between row 4 and row 6
in the column headed a1.f (where the dynamic type of a1 is B).  In
particular I can make sense of the table if the a1.f entry in row 6 were
phi' instead of phi''.

Is this a typo, an implementation fact of the system which isn't
supposed to be consistent, or am I simply missing the point?  My
conceptual model of dynamic binding leads me to expect that a1.f and b1.f
should agree when the latter is "legal".  I don't have an eiffel system
to test the table entries.

I realize that there may rarely (never?) be any reason to use row 6
but I appreciate any clarification.

As this may be a rather esoteric question and/or my obvious 
misconception, please respond by e-mail to mmartin@ducair.bitnet and I
will post interesting responses.

				Mike Martin