MB>> Sure it cannot because insert cannot. The problem and the error you did MB>> above is that you split an operation into two. Your real operation is MB>> insert_with_password and that is different from insert. Again insert is an
That's the whole point of OO - to allow overloading the same operation, so even classes that do not know about implementation details could use it. MB>> as a member and not as a base class. Maybe it is now a good thing to MB>> have a generalised container interface and declare insert in the container MB>> implementations final. Highly specialised containers would then inheritd I do not see why should container interface be final. MB>> A class that is derived from a concrete container may in some container MB>> implementations have final functions. For example whatever inherits a fifo Still have no explanation why anyone would need it. Just to disallow overriding "because we can"? I see no added value in that. MB>> If you have another insert implementation in a class than you MB>> missused inheritance. If the operation is different than your derived MB>> class is no for example no longer a fifo. Instead it uses a fifo. Implementation can be different and still be a fifo. That depends on overriding implementation. Again, I still have yet to see any example where the proposed 'final' plays substantial role and not just is there because 'maybe someone might want to use it'. -- Stanislav Malyshev, Zend Products Engineer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.zend.com/ +972-3-6139665 ext.109 -- PHP Development Mailing List <http://www.php.net/> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
