Re: Overloading

Park SungWoo (gladius@compiler.kaist.ac.kr)
Fri, 11 Apr 1997 01:27:51 +0900 (KST)

>
> What do you think of overloading PROTOs? Can you think
> of examples, where this makes sense:
>
> PROTO p [ field t1 f ... ] { body1 }
> PROTO p [ field t2 f ... ] { body2 }
>
> Instantiating p { f v } will yield an instance of
> body1 or body2 depending of the type of v.
>

In my opinion, although it is a good idea, it had better been prohibited.
As our object-orientation proposal goes larger, it becomes more complicated.
VRML is not a programming language. If the above two p's are diffrent
kinds of objects, then the VRML content designer will usually name them
diffently.

Also, I think our proposal should be rather simple, that is, it must not
be too wide or too complex. As Curtis pointed out, the main user of this
language would be content developers. Hence, I doubt this advanced idea
will be widely used.

Conclusion:
-> More powerful.
-> Yet, Simpler and Easier to Use.

-- 
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
 Sungwoo Park, (Castle-Help Naive)
	homepage : http://compiler.kaist.ac.kr/~gladius
 	e-mail : gladius@compiler.kaist.ac.kr
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -