On Tue, Mar 18, 2014, at 05:30 PM, William Squires wrote: > Hi all! > Some languages (like C++ and Visual C#) allow for partial abstract > classes (i.e. some methods are implemented, while others are left to > subclasses to implement - and, in fact, must implement since the > partial abstract class does not). Is there a way to do this in ObjC?
There is no language support in Objective-C for any sort of abstract classes. > Is this why NSObject implements a protocol called NSObject (i.e. to > make NSObject a partial abstract class)? No, NSObject is not an abstract class. NSObject-the-protocol exists because there are objects that conform to <NSObject> which are not instances of subclasses of NSObject—the best example is subclasses of NSProxy. > Finally, does anyone know of a tool that'll convert VC# (dot net) code > to ObjC (modern 2.0 syntax)? There are far bigger differences between the two environments than just the language you code in. Cocoa and the BCL are very different frameworks. > Can one forward declare an @protocol? Yes. You could have easily tried this for yourself. > Obviously (IIRC) a pure abstract class would map to a formal protocol > in ObjC (or a class interface in languages such as REALbasic/Xojo, or > VB 6). My best guess is to: No, that's not what protocols are for. Any class can conform to any protocol. --Kyle Sluder _______________________________________________ Cocoa-dev mailing list (Cocoa-dev@lists.apple.com) Please do not post admin requests or moderator comments to the list. Contact the moderators at cocoa-dev-admins(at)lists.apple.com Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/cocoa-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com
