Why should a class be anything other than "abstract" or "final/sealed"
Posted
by
Nicolas Repiquet
on Programmers
See other posts from Programmers
or by Nicolas Repiquet
Published on 2012-11-21T14:58:14Z
Indexed on
2012/11/21
17:15 UTC
Read the original article
Hit count: 292
object-oriented
|programming-practices
After 10+ years of java/c# programming, I find myself creating either:
- abstract classes: contract not meant to be instantiated as-is.
- final/sealed classes: implementation not meant to serve as base class to something else.
I can't think of any situation where a simple "class" (i.e. neither abstract nor final/sealed) would be "wise programming".
Why should a class be anything other than "abstract" or "final/sealed" ?
EDIT
This great article explains my concerns far better than I can.
© Programmers or respective owner