From: Ted Dennison<dennison@telepath.com>
Subject: Re: Abstract Functions
Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2001 15:22:42 GMT
Date: 2001-07-11T15:22:42+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <6b_27.15423$Kf3.181711@www.newsranger.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 9ihnia$i8h$1@nh.pace.co.uk
In article <9ihnia$i8h$1@nh.pace.co.uk>, Marin David Condic says...
>
>Suppose you have a tagged type that is not abstract, but you want to provide
>functions as a "template" that some inheritor is supposed to override. You
>can't make the functions abstract without the tagged type also being
>abstract. You might not want that because you might want data and operations
>in the parent class that actually work. Is there a way to say "Here's almost
I believe you can have non-abstract primitive subprograms for abstract types.
What's wrong with doing that?
---
T.E.D. homepage - http://www.telepath.com/dennison/Ted/TED.html
home email - mailto:dennison@telepath.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-07-11 15:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-07-11 14:24 Abstract Functions Marin David Condic
2001-07-11 15:22 ` Ted Dennison [this message]
2001-07-11 15:43 ` Marin David Condic
2001-07-11 16:35 ` Ehud Lamm
2001-07-11 17:08 ` Marin David Condic
2001-07-11 17:27 ` Ted Dennison
2001-07-16 21:43 ` Tucker Taft
2001-07-16 22:15 ` Marin David Condic
2001-07-16 21:51 ` Stephen Leake
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2001-07-11 14:49 Re[2]: " ANH_VO
2001-07-11 19:01 ` tmoran
2001-07-12 14:10 ` Marin David Condic
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox