Re: Not true for Java about Function Hijacking.

2011-05-26 Thread Dan Olson
I recall specific cases, though, in which hijacking can happen in java. I coded them up to make sure I remembed it correctly. Imagine a base class A and subclass B. =-=-= file A.java =-=-= public class A { // pretty boring } =-=-= file B.java =-=-= public class B extends A { private

Re: Not true for Java about Function Hijacking.

2011-05-23 Thread Matthew Ong
On 5/23/2011 5:37 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote: Report errors on the website and online documentation in bugzilla: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/ . Choose "D" (out of D, DStress, and puremagic.com) to get to the correct bug report form, and select "websites" as the component of the bug report. Bug

Re: Not true for Java about Function Hijacking.

2011-05-23 Thread Jonathan M Davis
On 2011-05-23 02:22, Matthew Ong wrote: > Hi Digitalmars/Walter Bright, > > > http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/hijack.html > > This talk covers function hijacking, where adding innocent and > reasonable declarations in a module can wreak arbitrary havoc on an > application program in C++(maybe t

Not true for Java about Function Hijacking.

2011-05-23 Thread Matthew Ong
Hi Digitalmars/Walter Bright, http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/hijack.html This talk covers function hijacking, where adding innocent and reasonable declarations in a module can wreak arbitrary havoc on an application program in C++(maybe true) and Java(not true). Since I have not done C++