Is using protected inheritance to hide (but exploit) implemented interface from the public ok?
Recently, we had a discussion about code using protected inheritance in order to hide the fact (to client code) a class inherits from a specific base class but to exploit this fact in the implementation.
Is using protected inheritance to hide (but exploit) implemented interface from the public ok?
Recently, we had a discussion about code using protected inheritance in order to hide the fact (to client code) a class inherits from a specific base class but to exploit this fact in the implementation.
Is using protected inheritance to hide (but exploit) implemented interface from the public ok?
Recently, we had a discussion about code using protected inheritance in order to hide the fact (to client code) a class inherits from a specific base class but to exploit this fact in the implementation.
Is using protected inheritance to hide (but exploit) implemented interface from the public ok?
Recently, we had a discussion about code using protected inheritance in order to hide the fact (to client code) a class inherits from a specific base class but to exploit this fact in the implementation.
Which one subsumes the other: class-based object-orientation or prototypal inheritance?
In this talk: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQVTIJBZook, Douglas Crockford claims that class-based object-orientation can be represented in terms of prototypal inheritance. The construction he gives is something like:
Which one subsumes the other: class-based object-orientation or prototypal inheritance?
In this talk: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQVTIJBZook, Douglas Crockford claims that class-based object-orientation can be represented in terms of prototypal inheritance. The construction he gives is something like:
Which one subsumes the other: class-based object-orientation or prototypal inheritance?
In this talk: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQVTIJBZook, Douglas Crockford claims that class-based object-orientation can be represented in terms of prototypal inheritance. The construction he gives is something like:
Which one subsumes the other: class-based object-orientation or prototypal inheritance?
In this talk: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQVTIJBZook, Douglas Crockford claims that class-based object-orientation can be represented in terms of prototypal inheritance. The construction he gives is something like:
What are the reasons to create UIView subclass?
I’ve noticed that there are a lot of UIView subclasses in my legacy project. Mostly the only reason of such a subclass is to split bigger view into custom subviews and provide layout for its subviews and delegation of UIButtons actions through the view delegate protocol. So I’m wondering, is it a correct design?
What are the reasons to create UIView subclass?
I’ve noticed that there are a lot of UIView subclasses in my legacy project. Mostly the only reason of such a subclass is to split bigger view into custom subviews and provide layout for its subviews and delegation of UIButtons actions through the view delegate protocol. So I’m wondering, is it a correct design?