class extensions

[Alexander Panek]

Alexander Panek wrote:
> Lars Ivar Igesund wrote:
>> [...]
>> It will also be directly detrimental to maintainability when used for 
>> user
>> defined types, as you no longer will be able to decide where a 
>> function is
>> implemented by only looking at the call site (given inheritance and
>> polymorphism this can in cases be difficult enough, but at least you 
>> have a
>> type hierarchy to look to).
> 
> Well, usually a simple change to the import list will reveal where each 
> functions are defined. I wouldn't see that as an argument against this 
> feature.
> 
> Apart from that, in an ideal world, the code is well documented enough 
> to not have to determine the location of a function/method 
> implementation yourself, anyways. Of course, this is the *ideal*, but 
> maybe this encourages some to document better.

On the other hand, the ambiguity problem:

class A {
     int foo (int);
}

int foo (A, int);

..leads or at least may lead to maintenance problems, anyways.

(Yes, I might have missed the point in the other post :P)