this is why there is a or in my expression and this is why I still
would like to have a way to declare a class as abstract even if it
does not have abstract methods.
stef
On Oct 5, 2008, at 11:34 PM, Alexandre Bergel wrote:
A class is said to be abstract if its not reasonable to instantiate
it. An abstract class may perfectly have no abstract method.
Cheers,
Alexandre
On 5 Oct 2008, at 11:49, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
I would really like to have a way to specify that a class is
abstract.
For example I would like to be able to write a test as follow
self assert: (Collection allSubclasses reject: [:each
each isAbstract ]) new isEmpty
now saying that isAbstract is if a class has one method sending
subclassResponsibility is not
really good for me.
May be we could have something like
isAbstract
^ self declaredAsAbstract
or: [ (self whichSelectorsReferToSymbol:
#subclassResponsibility) isEmpty not]
Stef
_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
--
_,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:
Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu
^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
