Re: Why is overriding unavailable designated initializer of super?required?
Re: Why is overriding unavailable designated initializer of super?required?
- Subject: Re: Why is overriding unavailable designated initializer of super?required?
- From: Quincey Morris <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2015 21:01:04 +0000
On Aug 10, 2015, at 13:27 , Seth Willits <email@hidden> wrote:
>
> What am I missing?
Coming at this from the other end (other than what Greg said):
— I think you are misunderstanding what NS_UNAVAILABLE means (although I’m by no means sure about that).
— You never needed to say anything about the “unavailable” initializers because they were never inherited. That is, if you were trying to prevent clients of Subclass from using the Superclass initWithSomething, you didn’t need to because Swift won’t let them do it anyway.
_______________________________________________
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