Broken?

[Szymon Gatner]

On Wednesday, 12 March 2014 at 13:53:28 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer 
wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Mar 2014 09:45:22 -0400, monarch_dodra 
> <monarchdodra at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wednesday, 12 March 2014 at 13:22:34 UTC, Steven 
>> Schveighoffer wrote:
>>> OK, I can see that being useful. You are right, I was 
>>> thinking C++ private.
>>>
>>> -Steve
>>
>> Even in C++, private virtual a key part of the "non-virtual 
>> interface" thing.
>>
>> EG: You define your base class as having only non-virtual 
>> public functions, and private virtual function. They are 
>> private, so the derived classes can't *call* them, but they 
>> can still override them.
>
> Nonsense. If I'm writing a function, I can call it. There is no 
> way to prevent it. e.g.:
>

The point is that you can't call parent's virtual (often 
abstract) method. Of course you can call method you define but 
that is not the point of NVI.