On Feb 1, 2008, at 10:18 AM, Adrian Kuhn wrote:
On 1 Feb 2008, at 9:24 , Tudor Girba wrote:
> A -> B still means that "A superclasses" includes B and that "B
> subclasses" includes A.
Correct notation is lower-than-colon!!!
A <: B
which means, A is a subtype of B. This is the standard notation in
typing theory (Luca Cadelli, etc pp...) we should stick to that.
Well, A -> B is in UML and I thought that we are closer to UML than we
are to typing theory. And until now we always took this view on the
world. Of course, we can change it, but it has nothing to do with
For the naming scheme, we should not take that to the ridiculous, it
does not make any sense to label inheritances in- or outgoing. We
should allow an exception of the rule there.
So, what would then names be then? Just for the record, I have no
preconceived ideas here.
Stef, it is exactly because of getting people confused that we said
that in case of confusion draw the UML diagram and then you know what
goes in and what gets out.
"We cannot reach the flow of things unless we let go."