Multiple inheritance is not supported in dotnet. But multiple interface supports? [duplicate]

Question

Possible Duplicate:
Multiple Inheritance in C#

Multiple inheritance is not supported in dotnet. But multiple interface supports. Why this kind of behaviour exists. Any specific reasons??

Answer 1

You can simulate multiple inheritance using interfaces. If multiple inheritance with classes were allowed, it would lead to the Diamond problem.
For reasons multiple inheritance is not supported, I suggest you read Why doesn't C# support multiple inheritance?

Different languages actually have different expectations for how MI works. For example, how conflicts are resolved and whether duplicate bases are merged or redundant. Before we can implement MI in the CLR, we have to do a survey of all the languages, figure out the common concepts, and decide how to express them in a language-neutral manner. We would also have to decide whether MI belongs in the CLS and what this would mean for languages that don't want this concept (presumably VB.NET, for example). Of course, that's the business we are in as a common language runtime, but we haven't got around to doing it for MI yet.

The number of places where MI is truly appropriate is actually quite small. In many cases, multiple interface inheritance can get the job done instead. In other cases, you may be able to use encapsulation and delegation. If we were to add a slightly different construct, like mixins, would that actually be more powerful?

Multiple implementation inheritance injects a lot of complexity into the implementation. This complexity impacts casting, layout, dispatch, field access, serialization, identity comparisons, verifiability, reflection, generics, and probably lots of other places.