Timeline for Are abstract classes / methods obsolete?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
21 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 19, 2017 at 4:31 | answer | added | user204677 | timeline score: 0 | |
| Apr 6, 2017 at 21:04 | answer | added | Dave Cousineau | timeline score: 0 | |
| Oct 20, 2014 at 11:39 | history | protected | gnat | ||
| Jul 22, 2011 at 9:11 | comment | added | Jack V. | Isn't this like saying "are modes of transport obsolete now we have cars?" Yeah, most of the time, you use a car. But whether you ever need anything other than a car or not, it wouldn't really be correct to say "I don't need to use modes of transport". An interface is much the same as an abstract class without any implementation, and with a special name, no? | |
| Jul 22, 2011 at 0:36 | answer | added | Dmitriy R | timeline score: 1 | |
| Jul 21, 2011 at 21:47 | answer | added | back2dos | timeline score: 4 | |
| Jul 21, 2011 at 21:44 | answer | added | Eric Lippert | timeline score: 7 | |
| Jul 21, 2011 at 18:34 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/#!/StackProgrammer/status/94112963312631808 | ||
| Jul 21, 2011 at 17:24 | comment | added | WinW | @jiggy, yeah true..but what about abstract methods? they can be used for polymorphism as well. in fact abstract methods and interfaces are interchangeable from that perspective | |
| Jul 21, 2011 at 17:14 | vote | accept | Boris Yankov | ||
| Jul 21, 2011 at 16:56 | comment | added | jiggy | Interfaces are the "currency" of object references. Generally speaking they are the fundament of polymorphic behavior. Abstract classes serve a different purpose that deadalnix explained perfectly. | |
| Jul 21, 2011 at 16:08 | answer | added | WinW | timeline score: 10 | |
| Jul 21, 2011 at 16:01 | comment | added | Bernard | @gbjbaanb: I suppose. I don't recall using them as interfaces, but rather to provide default implementations. | |
| Jul 21, 2011 at 15:51 | comment | added | gbjbaanb | @Bernard: in C++, an abstract class is an interface in all but name. That they can also do more than 'pure' interfaces is not a disadvantage. | |
| Jul 21, 2011 at 15:49 | answer | added | gbjbaanb | timeline score: 4 | |
| Jul 21, 2011 at 15:48 | comment | added | Bernard | How about if your programming language of choice does not support interfaces? I seem to recall this is the case for C++. | |
| Jul 21, 2011 at 15:48 | answer | added | Scott Whitlock | timeline score: 15 | |
| Jul 21, 2011 at 15:47 | answer | added | DeadMG | timeline score: 2 | |
| Jul 21, 2011 at 15:47 | answer | added | configurator | timeline score: 1 | |
| Jul 21, 2011 at 15:46 | answer | added | deadalnix | timeline score: 114 | |
| Jul 21, 2011 at 15:39 | history | asked | Boris Yankov | CC BY-SA 3.0 |