Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!mcsun!sunic!tut!tukki!sakkinen
From: sakkinen@tukki.jyu.fi (Markku Sakkinen)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.eiffel
Subject: Re: Renaming vs. Conformance
Message-ID: <3509@tukki.jyu.fi>
Date: 22 Feb 90 14:27:40 GMT
References: <32149@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU>
Reply-To: sakkinen@jytko.jyu.fi (Markku Sakkinen)
Organization: University of Jyvaskyla, Finland
Lines: 23

In article <32149@shemp.CS.UCLA.EDU> rowley@cs.ucla.edu writes:
>I have been looking into questions of multiple inheritance, especially
>with regard to repeated inheritance. In eiffel a feature may be
>renamed along one of the inheritance paths, giving the descendant two
>features inherited from the same ancestor.  (See FRANCE_US_DIVER on
>p.276 of OOSC).  If the feature is not renamed, the descendent gets
>only one feature.  It seems that the use of renaming would break the
>conformance rule (on p.262).
> ...

Similar problems were last discussed in this group last autumn, I think.
The points you make are important and valid.
If a plug is allowed (again), I happened to analyse exactly this example
in my paper at ECOOP'89. Look in the proceedings if you can get them
or contact me for details.

Markku Sakkinen
Department of Computer Science
University of Jyvaskyla (a's with umlauts)
Seminaarinkatu 15
SF-40100 Jyvaskyla (umlauts again)
Finland
          SAKKINEN@FINJYU.bitnet (alternative network address)