• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
Re: Abstract classes and methods
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Abstract classes and methods


  • Subject: Re: Abstract classes and methods
  • From: Chris Gehlker <email@hidden>
  • Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2001 10:26:49 -0700

On 8/29/01 7:30 AM, "Smith, Bradley" <email@hidden> wrote:

> Seems I was talking about methods whilst everyone else is talking about
> classes. Anyway, what I said still holds true. Coming from C++ I tend to
> think of the effect that virtual and pure virtual methods have on my class
> as opposed to deciding what type of class I have. If I have a pure method
> then my class is abstract (in the English sense of the word) in that there
> can never be an instance of that class.
>

I have a friend who insists that classes w/o pure virtual functions but with
virtual destors be called "abstract concrete." He argues that the fact that
it's an oxymoron gives it extra mnemonic punch. :-)
--
The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that,
you've got it made. -Groucho Marx


  • Follow-Ups:
    • Re: Abstract classes and methods
      • From: Jonathan Hendry <email@hidden>
References: 
 >RE: Abstract classes and methods (From: "Smith, Bradley" <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: Re: Abstract classes and methods
  • Next by Date: Re: (no subject)
  • Previous by thread: RE: Abstract classes and methods
  • Next by thread: Re: Abstract classes and methods
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread