On Aug 30, 2005, at 3:59 PM, Joseph J. Strout wrote:
At 4:36 PM -0500 8/30/05, William Squires wrote:
I'm not saying to 'New' a reference to "Object", as you can't -
it's an abstract class; intended only to be subclassed. You 'New' a
reference to some other subclass (that's not abstract), then assign
the reference thereof to a variable (or array) of type
'reference-to-Object' so that you can take advantage of polymorphism
without type-mismatch errors.
This thread is about actually, literally, saying "New Object".
Apparently that generates an error in REALbasic 2005, though it was
allowed in 5.5.
Yes, but 55 did allow other things that probably should have been
flagged as errors of one kind or another
Maybe this is just one of those "should have been an error in 5.5 but
wasn't caught but now is" kinds of things ?
What would you DO with one created this way anyways ?
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>
Search the archives of this list here:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>
|