>Thomas,
>
>>True, but you can fake it (sort of...<g>)
>
>That would do it, but at the cost of explicitly requiring no dodefault() call in the the subclass. This is dangerous because it's only true at the first level of subclass . And since you may not know when code at a higher level will be inserted. For example:

I've seen this tamed like this:

>

define class GraphicAbstractObject as custom
   x = 0
   y = 0

function moveTo( newX, newY )
  this.AbstractWarn()
endfunc

function draw()
  this.AbstractWarn()
endfunc

function AbstractWarn()
  if this.class="GraphicAbstractObject"  
    local lcSetAssert
    lcSetAssert = set("Assert")
    set Assert on
*-- and show the caller's name, not the warning's name:
    assert .f. Message Program(program(-1)-1) + " should be overwritten !"
    set Assert &lcSetAssert
  endif

enddefine

The downside of this approach is that the class has to have its abstract level name hardcoded somewhere (either as a property, or in the abstractwarn()).