This week I noticed I was using abstract classes as concrete classes. Trying to reconstruct things I again started to doubt the usefulness of having abstract classes.
Some history: I'm probably the only developer in the whole world who's actually using this great tool NewClass.app - written by myself and available to all at
http://www.viafox.nl/downloads/NewClass_beta2.zip - and thereby giving structure to the names of his new classes. It is a wizardlike tool and one of the first choices to be made is whether the new class will be abstract or concrete. After a while I noticed that I had been using abstract classes in my form, notwithstanding the fact that they can be easilly recognized by the underscore at the end of their name. However, the form works perfect.
The crucial issue is that there is probably no gain in having a concrete class that's totally equal to the abstract class that it is based on. On the contrary, there is likely a loss, for example because it gives useless overhead in loading.
What's your opinion here?
Groet,
Peter de Valença
Constructive frustration is the breeding ground of genius.
If there’s no willingness to moderate for the sake of good debate, then I have no willingness to debate at all.
Let's develop superb standards that will end the holy wars.
"There are three types of people: Alphas and Betas", said the beta decisively.
If you find this message rude or offensive or stupid, please take a step away from the keyboard and try to think calmly about an eventual a possible alternative explanation of my message.
