I’m really getting to like rackets objects, they seem far more flexible than Java. Are mixins the only way to do multiple inheritance?

@mark.warren also traits

(which are implemented in terms of mixins but that’s not really important)

@samth Ah haven’t got that far yet, cool, I’ll check it out.

@mark.warren If you are interested in the CS side of objects, check http://users.cs.northwestern.edu/~robby/pubs/papers/aplas2006-fff.pdf

@soegaard2 Thanks for the link, I’ll give it look. I’ve got a long Java history, so multiple inheritance sort of blows my mind.

Check “inners” too. They come from Beta.

(Speaking of features not in Java)

@soegaard2 Ooh, sounds like fun. I also like the smalltalk like idea that you send a message to an object so two completely different classes could implement the same method without actually being related.

I’m an old OO programmer… cut my teeth in smalltalk, poked at many/most of them, and now make my living in ruby (which I think has one of the better designed OO models to address multiple inheritance nightmares)… I haven’t gotten a hang of OO in any lisp yet and only poked at racket’s when doing GUI/drawing stuff. Is there anything in particular you like about it?

re-skimming that aplas pdf… yeah. it still feels… I dunno, inconsistent and clunky to me.

A rather poorly formed noobie question…

But is confluence like all the possible equivalent AST’s for any expression?