Thank you for the luck! :)
Regards
H
Printable View
Nope it would be you. You are the Senior member who forgets how to behave and has the senior moments. And I mean plural, because you have had many of them over the past year. You think that you can just blurt anything out about C++ programmers. It is you who have the limited view of C++ programmers. You with the smart allec comments, and you who needs to learn manners.
Thank you for expanding my view on C++ programmers. Always well-mannered and never a senior moment right. Maybe I should ask one for a date. You don't happen to be ...
But that won't change the facts. The predominant usage of the term polymorphism in the C++ community is limited compared with how it's used in the broader context of type systems.
Are those really your professional ideas? Awesome, Wow!
Simply Brilliant. Your nothing but a common Troll.
Mind your manners. Use arguments not defamating comments.
It's not an idea, it's an observation. This is very typical,
http://www.cplusplus.com/doc/tutorial/polymorphism/
I quote,
"One of the key features of derived classes is that a pointer to a derived class is type-compatible with a pointer to its base class. Polymorphism is the art of taking advantage of this simple but powerful and versatile feature, that brings Object Oriented Methodologies to its full potential."
My emphasis. Sometimes also the mechanism of overloading is included in the concept of polymorphism and contrasted with the above and you get the "static vs. dynamic" distinction.
Ask a C++ programmer about polymorphism and the above is the answer you're most likely to get. I'm not saying it's wrong or bad. But it's a limited view of what constitutes polymorphism.
This is because of the c++ standard. The only type of polymorphic behavior that goes by its direct effect is class polymorphismQuote:
Originally Posted by nuzzle
That is because c++ doesn't have another terminology for class polymorphism and therefore is typically referred to as polymorphism in general. I surely know how to use other types of polymorphism. The only thing I have to know is the c++ terminology when dealing with c++. So I go by c++ terminology like type casting since this is what the c++ standard goes by and not polymorphic coercion. So yes I know polymorphic coercion, inclusion polymorphism( aka subtype ), ad-hoc polymorphism, parametric polymorphism and whatever else is polymorphic in c++ by its terminology in c++.Quote:
Originally Posted by nuzzle
c++ is oop and that is what c++ mandates as polymorphism directlyQuote:
Originally Posted by nuzzle
So it does make since to use c++ terminology directly and not necessary how polymorphism applies to every part of the language in general.Quote:
Originally Posted by c++11 10.3
I observe that my post #12 and Lindley's post #13 did not get ahoodin so riled up, probably because I used "we (...) in C++", Lindley spoke about "C++", and we made objective statements about what is the norm with respect to C++, rather than use a phrase like "quite limited outlook" to contrast with "broader view" that can be intepreted as an aspersion on "C++ programmers" as a group from which you are trying to dissociate yourself. I doubt that these were your intentions, but phrased as such, I can see why ahoodin felt you were trolling.Quote:
Originally Posted by nuzzle
I agree.Quote:
Originally Posted by nuzzle
Lol. From my experience, nuzzle has a habit of defending C++, funny that you now put him in the "other camp". XD
Sure, we've all seen that nuzzle has his moments, but I think you're just overreacting to his comment - which wasn't particularly offensive, or ill-tempered. As far as I know nuzzle is a C++ programmer himself, at least among other things.
It's good to have a more brother view of things, and specifically in this case, we all can agree that the idea of polymorphism is not something language-specific.
Yes, you may never need to deal with it outside the context of C++, but it is important to make the distinction between what it fundamentally is, and how it manifests itself in the language mechanisms of C++. Then you can realize that it doesn't have to stop there, and that having this broader view will make you a better programmer, and it just might come in handy some day, when thinking out of the box is required.
I agree knowing how things work and why is important. That is why I like computers in the first place :) They are quite complicated.
Don't blame me if ahoodin zaps you with a laser, or more likely polymorphs you into a sheep :pQuote:
Originally Posted by nuzzle