tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8768285918186248163.post8864661059828083894..comments2008-03-26T21:38:06.242-07:00emachine74noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8768285918186248163.post-67578759088951373852008-03-26T21:38:00.000-07:002008-03-26T21:38:00.000-07:002008-03-26T21:38:00.000-07:00The name alone sounds like the same concept, so I think you may be right. <BR/><BR/>My OOP experience has been exclusive to .net, so now inheritance was always my first instinct. For a while I was trying to produce these crazy "inheritance chains" of base classes from which I could derive game objects of varying complexity; but I could never produce anything elegant or satisfying in that regard. It was a real relief to realize a different way to combine class functionality without being "forced" to use inheritance :)emachine74http://www.blogger.com/profile/16131803862986581964noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8768285918186248163.post-15437802571541248432008-03-26T19:05:00.000-07:002008-03-26T19:05:00.000-07:002008-03-26T19:05:00.000-07:00Isn't composition another word for implementation? At least, that's how it seems to me. Coming from a VB6 background, I learned the implementation side of OOP long before I was able to use real inheritance, and I'd always longed for the latter. It's funny to see others doing the opposite.Tomhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08993249001685284317noreply@blogger.com