Re: What's with these redundant methods ?
Re: What's with these redundant methods ?
- Subject: Re: What's with these redundant methods ?
- From: MarketLogix Developer <email@hidden>
- Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 18:40:34 -0700
On Tuesday, April 22, 2003, at 02:45 PM, Chris Hanson wrote:
At 9:02 AM -0700 4/22/03, MarketLogix Developer wrote:
Well, true I do not implement those but Object from the ObjC runtime
does implement
respondsTo: and methodFor: and any class that I implement will
inherit from Object and
so inherit these.
Not true. (Unless I misunderstand what you're saying.)
If you write
@interface Foo
{ }
@end
you've declared a new root class, not a subclass of NSObject or
Object. You have to explicitly specify a superclass if you want to
create a subclass. If you're doing Cocoa development, you should
generally be subclassing NSObject or one of its subclasses, or if
you're creating a new root class it should implement the NSObject
protocol.
You misunderstand.
Everything that I've ever written in ObjC (and that dates back to
StepStone/DOS work in the 80's) inherits from Object
or a subclass of Object. I can't really see what use there would be
otherwise. NOT inheriting from Object means that
you have NO isa pointer and so no accessible dispatch table. How you
gonna send a message to Foo ?
NSObject protocol .... AHA, now this makes sense !!!! Thanks, I will
look into that.
-----------------------------------------------
bisk ~ OSX.2.4
G4 PowerMac Gigabit, Dual 500
Sony SDM-M81 18.1" LCD display
1GB, 40GB, SuperDrive(DVR 105)
HP "All-in-One" d135 BubbleJet
-----------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
cocoa-dev mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives:
http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/cocoa-dev
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.