Should certain abstract classes be instantiable?

Nick Sabalausky a at a.a
Sun Oct 4 23:24:13 PDT 2009


"Andrei Alexandrescu" <SeeWebsiteForEmail at erdani.org> wrote in message 
news:ha8beq$2tn9$1 at digitalmars.com...
> Ary Borenszweig wrote:
>>
>> Umm... so it defines a body that will never be used because that class 
>> can't be instantiated and the method must be redefined by subclasses? 
>> Isn't that the same as "doesn't provide a body"?
>
> import std.stdio;
>
> class A {
>     abstract void fun() { writeln("wyda"); }
> }
>
>
> class B : A {
>     void fun() { A.fun(); }
> }
>
> unittest {
>     A a = new B;
>     a.fun();
>     a.A.fun();
> }
>

Not a rhetorical or a loaded question: Has that sort of thing ever been 
useful?





More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list