"spir" wrote
Say I have a Tree type that may be based on 2 kinds of Node-s.
Both conceptually and practically, a tree itself is a node, namely the
top/root one.
Thats one way to do it...
But a tree also has some additional tree-level behaviour, which is
independant
of the kind of node.
On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 1:57 PM, spir wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Say I have a Tree type that may be based on 2 kinds of Node-s. Both
> conceptually and practically, a tree itself is a node, namely the top/root
> one. But a tree also has some additional tree-level behaviour, which is
> independant of th
Hello,
Say I have a Tree type that may be based on 2 kinds of Node-s. Both
conceptually and practically, a tree itself is a node, namely the top/root one.
But a tree also has some additional tree-level behaviour, which is independant
of the kind of node. Say, the node type performs all the unde
