Timeline for What other reasons are there to write interfaces rather than abstract classes?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 23, 2017 at 11:33 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://stackoverflow.com/ with https://stackoverflow.com/
|
|
| Jan 8, 2012 at 13:14 | history | edited | Gary Willoughby | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 113 characters in body
|
| Jan 8, 2012 at 13:04 | comment | added | Gary Willoughby | Why use an abstract class when a normal class would do, etc..? Yes an abstract class would 'do' in this example but that is not the right way to do it, especially if you are only interested if an object implements a particular interface. This is the fundamental difference in why you would choose one over the other. If you notice in the function i am constraining to an interface not an object, that is a huge difference. | |
| Jan 8, 2012 at 12:49 | comment | added | Oded | An abstract class would do just fine in your example. Doesn't really answer the question. | |
| Jan 8, 2012 at 12:47 | vote | accept | javastudent | ||
| Jan 8, 2012 at 12:47 | |||||
| Jan 8, 2012 at 12:45 | history | answered | Gary Willoughby | CC BY-SA 3.0 |