Several implementations of mixins (e.g. Ruby mixin, Scala trait) include support for storing data (e.g. variables, properties) between method calls in instance variables. There was a bit of debate in this question about whether or not a Java virtual extension method qualified as a mixin because they cannot store data in this way; all variables are inputted and outputted within the scope of the method call and cannot be stored in an instance variable. Essentially, there was debate about what a "mixin" by definition is and whether or not implementations in Ruby and whatnot go beyond the commonly recognized definition of the programming concept.

Unfortunately, the definition of a mixin seem rather vague in this regard. For instance, Wikipedia says the following:

With mixins the class definition defines only the attributes and parameters associated with that class; methods are left to be defined elsewhere, as in Flavors and CLOS, and are organized in "generic functions". These generic functions are functions that are defined in multiple cases (methods) by type dispatch and method combinations.

The above says that a mixin defines attributes, but doesn't cite sources that might clarify this. However, every other definition simply fails to mention whether or not mixins allow storing data or if they are limited to methods. To further add confusion, Wikipedia earlier describes mixins as an interface with implemented methods, but interfaces can't store instance variables. I tried to find out how it was defined in Flavors, which was the first programming language to use something called "mixins", but I couldn't find enough information online about it.

So can a mixin by definition allow storing data? Or is this something that is ambiguous and is left up to the programming language to decide?

  • 2
    I don't understand the question... Languages decide their features and whether they have mixins or traits or what have you, what those are capable of is defined by the language... I don't see how language features relate to data storage? Commented Nov 19, 2013 at 21:00
  • Isn't saving data part of a method's behavior (if desired)? Seems as if the Wikipedia definition leaves such behavior up to the programmer. Commented Nov 19, 2013 at 21:00
  • 2
    @JimmyHoffa, I'm asking about the consensus definition of what it is. For instance, what do people mean when they ask "Does X language support mixins?". This was prompted by the Java Virtual Extension Method question I linked to where the two answers didn't seem to agree on what a mixin is. Commented Nov 19, 2013 at 21:07
  • @RobertHarvey, the difference would be whether or not data can be stored in instance variables or whatnot or if it's just for the one method call. You could have a method that inputs and outputs data, then deletes all references to it in memory as soon as the method call ends. Commented Nov 19, 2013 at 21:08
  • There is no canonical definition, just the first implementation and then others who did something similar and reused the term. Mostly they called it something else, in fact, and then somebody asked "Is this a mixin?" and they said "I guess so". Surely a precise definition of the behaviour is what matters, not some vague label.
    – itsbruce
    Commented Nov 19, 2013 at 21:37

1 Answer 1


The paper Mixin-based Inheritance by Bracha and Cook [PDF] shows that inheritance as found in the languages Smalltalk, Beta and CLOS can be reinterpreted as specializations of mixin inheritance.

The main point here is that inheritance can be viewed as a linear application of abstract deltas to a base class, e.g.

class Foo {
  int num = 42;
  int doStuff() { return num; }

class Bar extends Foo {
  void otherStuff() { return; }

– here we could interpret both classes as deltas: The Foo mixin adds a doStuff method and a num member, while Bar adds otherStuff. However, mixins can't be instantiated on their own (are abstract). Expressed this way, with mixin composition via the operator:

mixin MFoo {
  int num = 42;
  int doStuff() { return num; }

class Foo = MFoo ⊕ Object;

mixin MBar {
  void otherStuff() { return; }

class Bar = MBar ⊕ Foo
          = MBar ⊕ (MFoo ⊕ Object)

Classical single inheritance is a specialization of mixins where each delta can only be applied to a single superclass (MBar can only be applied to Foo, but not also to Baz).

If single class inheritance can be viewed as a specialization of mixins, then mixins allow the inheritance of data! However, a specific specialization of mixins need not require this. Both class inheritance and interfaces are specializations of mixins.

Java's extension methods do not allow storage of state, thus Java 8 interfaces are not able to model class inheritance. Therefore, these interfaces are not mixins in the sense of Bracha and Cook. They do however offer mixin-like functionality in that they allow to inherit functionality from multiple types, thus providing a weak kind of multiple inheritance.

Two points remain worth mentioning, although they are tangential to my argument:

First, nowadays traits are all the rage. This is an extension of mixins that doesn't require linear composition. All newer mixin-like systems actually implement traits or at least call them such.

Second, the design rationale for extension methods in Java 8 is not primarily to add mixins, traits, or multiple inheritance but rather to add the ability to retroactively extend existing interfaces to use new methods. It is intended that these extension methods are overridden by implementing classes. Importantly, this allows to update the Collection interface to include methods like the higher-order function map without breaking code that implemented Collection during Java 7 times and thus has no implementation for map.

  • Thanks for thoroughly explaining this. I especially like how you compared and contrasted it to similar programming concepts to better distinguish it. Commented Nov 20, 2013 at 2:31

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.