'abstract class' versus 'normal class' for a reusable library
- by Greg
I'm developing a reusable library and have been creating abstract classes, so the client can then extend from these.
QUESTION: Is there any reason in fact I should use an abstract class here as opposed to just a normal class?
Note - Have already decided I do not want to use interfaces as I want to include actual default methods in my library so the client using it doesn't have to write the code.