On Wed, 2002-11-27 at 16:20, Hal E. Fulton wrote:
>> I wonder: Would there be any value in Stack and
>> Queue classes that inherited from Array?
 
Nat Pryce <nat.pryce / b13media.com> wrote:
> If anything, Stack and Queue classes should encapsulate an array.
> 
> Even better, there should be different Stack and Queue classes that have
> the same API and are implemented using different data structures:
> arrays, linked lists, heaps, etc. etc.

And matz wrote
> I think Array is too big, and has too much methods unnecessary to
> Stack and Queue.

The following quote from Paul Graham made quite an impression on me - I
wonder what other people think about it:

 In Common Lisp I have often wanted to iterate through the fields of a
 struct-- to comb out references to a deleted object, for example, or
 find fields that are uninitialized. I know the structs are just vectors
 underneath. And yet I can't write a general purpose function that I can
 call on any struct. I can only access the fields by name, because that's
 what a struct is supposed to mean.
 
 A hacker may only want to subvert the intended model of things once or
 twice in a big program. But what a difference it makes to be able to. 
 
   - Paul Graham, from 'Being Popular'
   http://www.paulgraham.com/popular.html

martin