Posted by Daniel Longest on April 18, 2001 at 00:08:33:
In Reply to: Walking Plants posted by J Glidewell on April 17, 2001 at 18:52:09:
Thinking logically, why would you give behavior to an object that it shouldn't have? To simplify the inheritance hierachy? This is not a good reason to do this, IMO. Taking, for example, the square/rectangle example used in class, or the classic circle/ellipse example. A circle may be an ellipse and a square may be a rectangle in math but not in terms of inheritance. In this case, while a plant may share some things with other creatures, having a move command makes no sense really. Unless the plant is radioactive but I didn't see that mentioned.
: Will points be deducted from the project (not the design) if plants inherit a move function? Because some creatures have ticks that are "no move", I originally designed it so the plants inherited the move function, but each turn they would do a "no move". Since a move function only modifies location (which all living beings have) I didn't see any reason to exclude plants from inheriting this function.
Post a Followup