On 6 nov 2011, at 14:10, Bryan Harrison wrote: > I'm a total tyro and hope nobody minds if I fire off the occasional > incredibly elementary question. > > I'm reviewing some sample code and am looking at a class with a method > declared in @implementation which isn't mentioned in any @interface. > > Is this a private method, something else entirely, or merely sloppy coding? > > If the former, how does this technique compare with the trick of putting an… > > @interface someClass () > - (type) somePrivateMethod; > @end > > …in the implementation?
Hello Bryan, That would be a private method, or - like Graham pointed out - an override of a method from a superclass. I guess it could also be "dead" code (not called from anywhere), but that's typically not very likely. In OjbC you don't need to provide declarations for a method "foo" if all callers of foo can "see" the definition of foo (ie. if they are themselves defined *after* foo). The definition also serves as a declaration in such a case. Sure you can provide private declarations in a class extension, but why would you? To avoid repetition is a virtue, and one of the more important ones at that. j o a r _______________________________________________ Cocoa-dev mailing list ([email protected]) 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: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/cocoa-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to [email protected]
