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: Seth Willits <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2015 18:03:56 -0700
> On Aug 10, 2015, at 4:29 PM, Greg Parker <email@hidden> wrote:
>
> Writing a halting cover for the superclass's designated initializers is a defensive measure. If you miss one of the convenience initializers then getting an immediate crash with a crash log pointing to the initializer is much better than quietly calling the wrong initializers and mysteriously crashing somewhere else later.
Ok, that's the potential answer I was expecting. It'd be really nice if Xcode or the compiler actually gave succinct rationale for some of the more involved warnings and errors like this.
Thanks.
--
Seth Willits
_______________________________________________
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