Re: Using performSelector: on super
Re: Using performSelector: on super
- Subject: Re: Using performSelector: on super
- From: "Shawn Erickson" <email@hidden>
- Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2008 12:38:45 -0700
On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 12:18 PM, James Bucanek <email@hidden> wrote:
> email@hidden <mailto:email@hidden> wrote (Tuesday,
> August 5, 2008 5:41 AM +0100):
>>
>> My superclass (SuperSocket) provides a private method -close.
>
> Others have adiquetly explained the whole 'self' vs. 'super' issue, but this
> statement still has me stumped and I'm wondering why this even came up.
>
> There is no such thing as a "private" method in Objective-C. The @private,
> @protected, @public keywords only work on instance variables. So if the
> super class implements -close, there should never be anything stopping your
> subclass from simply calling [super close].
True however...
It could be that he has a method defined in a class continuation
(Objective-C 2.0) or private category in an implementation file. This
would result in subclasses not seeing the methods declaration.
So if the subclass attempts to send such a method at a minimum the
compiler may warn about it not responding to that method (depends on
the packaging of the super class in question) and at worst the
compiler could emit a call chain that incorrectly passes parameters
and/or fetches the return value as result of incorrect assumptions
about parameter/return types (should see a warning as well).
-Shawn
_______________________________________________
Cocoa-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Please do not post admin requests or moderator comments to the list.
Contact the moderators at cocoa-dev-admins(at)lists.apple.com
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden