Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.smalltalk,comp.lang.eiffel,comp.lang.ada,comp.object,comp.software-eng
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!rochester!cornellcs!newsstand.cit.cornell.edu!newstand.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!rill.news.pipex.net!pipex!uunet!in2.uu.net!uucp5.uu.net!alexandria.organon.com!alexandria!jsa
From: jsa@alexandria (Jon S Anthony)
Subject: Re: What is wrong with OO ?
In-Reply-To: ohk@edeber.tfdt-o.nta.no's message of 13 Feb 1997 07:52:32 GMT
Message-ID: <JSA.97Feb13195750@alexandria>
Sender: news@organon.com (news)
Organization: Organon Motives, Inc.
References: <5dopri$dei@news4.digex.net>
	<01bc183a$831b3760$1544db03@gecmf-pc-eddjab.gecmf.capital.ge.com>
	<OHK.97Feb13085232@edeber.tfdt-o.nta.no>
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 1997 00:57:49 GMT
Lines: 21
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu comp.lang.c++:247809 comp.lang.smalltalk:51588 comp.lang.eiffel:18434 comp.lang.ada:57587 comp.object:61132 comp.software-eng:53779

In article <OHK.97Feb13085232@edeber.tfdt-o.nta.no> ohk@edeber.tfdt-o.nta.no (Ole-Hjalmar Kristensen FOU.TD/DELAB) writes:

> 
>    I think the point he is making is that if you DON'T make the function
>    virtual, then other programmers CAN'T override it.  Therefore, C++
> 
> This is patently wrong. You can override it as much as you like
> whether the function is virtual or not. What you don't get if it's not
> defined to be virtual in the base class is run time dispatching.

In this context, that's what "override" refers to.  Admittedly a sloppy
use of a term if there ever was one...

/Jon
-- 
Jon Anthony
Organon Motives, Inc.
Belmont, MA 02178
617.484.3383
jsa@organon.com

