From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: fac41,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public X-Google-Thread: 109fba,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: 114809,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid114809,public X-Google-Thread: f43e6,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: jsa@alexandria (Jon S Anthony) Subject: Re: What is wrong with OO ? Date: 1997/02/13 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 218391500 Sender: news@organon.com (news) References: <5dopri$dei@news4.digex.net> Organization: Organon Motives, Inc. Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.smalltalk,comp.lang.eiffel,comp.lang.ada,comp.object,comp.software-eng Date: 1997-02-13T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article FEYNMAN@acs.tamu.edu (Hamilton, Robert Bryan ) writes: > On Wed, 12 Feb 1997 01:01:25 GMT, Jon S Anthony wrote: > >This seems really confused. How are the _inherited_ classes > >overriding a _parent's_ function? I suppose you meant subclasses. > >Anyway, you got it backwards. The point is that if you don't make the > >things virtual, you can't do the overrides (and other attendant > >stuff). > > ??? You can override any method in C++, virtual or no. > The difference is that virtual function _must_ be overridden if > you plan to use it. No, we're not talking "override" as in "overloading" or "hiding". The context _is_ the case of overriding dispatchable methods. > The _real_ point is that you have access to a virtual method even if Actually, given the context, this is irrelevant. > >So, there is this problem of either making everything > >virtual, and possibly providing misleading, inappropriate or possibly > >simply inefficient aspects, or not and then risking the mentioned > >problems. > > This is no problem unless one makes it one through bad practice. > Just don't use virtual functions _unless_ doing so enhances the clarity > of the program! Otherwise there's no point to it. You've completely missed the point of the whole discussion... /Jon -- Jon Anthony Organon Motives, Inc. Belmont, MA 02178 617.484.3383 jsa@organon.com