Yes
you are correct in your description of how Rose works.
The
reason is that you do not have to implement the virtual operator in the child
class.
You
may have a grandchild that you want to be the first implementation of the
operation.
You
are correct that Rose does not have any internal link from an abstract
operator.
Rose is a language independent tool and the rules of
the language determine the rules
of how abreact is handled.
Eric
-----Original Message-----
From: Aleksey Voitovich [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, March 16, 2001 9:04 AM
To: Rose Forum (E-mail)
Subject: (ROSE) virtual methodsDear all,I'm newcomer in this forum, so maybe my question had been already discussed.but, if I create a Class A having some virtual (or even abstract) methods, and then Class B, that generalize the class A, I get all public and protected methods of A inherited in the B. That's great. But I also want to generate a C++ code of these classes. And to implement those virtual methods in B, I should create them again in B with the same signatures. This is not very convenient. But worse, if I later change signatures of virtual methods in class A, I could forget to change them in class B.Is this my mistake or it has a conceptual explanation ?hope someone could help me...Thank you in advance,Aleksey Voitovich
