[Haskell-cafe] OOP'er with (hopefully) trivial questions.....

[Derek Elkins]

On Mon, 2007-12-17 at 22:12 +0300, Miguel Mitrofanov wrote:
> > There's a third way, too, and I haven't seen anybody mention it yet
> 
> I've noticed it, but there are some problems with this  
> representation, so I decided not to mention it. It's OK as far as we  
> don't want functions working on two areas - I don't see, how we can  
> implement, say, intersect :: Shape -> Shape -> Bool in this way.  
> However, it's a useful pattern.

And how do you do it in a "typical" OO language like Java or C# or
Smalltalk?