Re: A question on class Vocal :: Application (related to util/Application.h, Application.cxx)

Abraham WEI wrote:
> class Application : public Vocal::Runnable
> 
> This is how class Application is declared. While class Runnable has a
> pure virtual function member run(), which is defined as
> virtual ReturnCode  	    run() = 0;
> ,
> class Application doesn't has a function member with the same name.
> I guess this goes against the C++ rules, since classes (child classes)
> that derive from an abstract base class(i.e. one with a pure virtual
> function member) should have a function member with the same name as
> that pure virtual function member in the base abstract base class.
>      However, the VOCAL source compile well. Could anyone please give
> any explanation?
>      Thanks in advance.

The actual instantiated objects are children of Application, and do
implement the run() method??

Ben

> 
> Abe
> 
> _______________________________________________
> vocal mailing list
> [email protected]
> To unsubscribe, please go to http://www.vovida.org/mailman/listinfo/vocal
> 


-- 
Ben Greear <[email protected]>
Candela Technologies Inc  http://www.candelatech.com

_______________________________________________
vocal mailing list
[email protected]
To unsubscribe, please go to http://www.vovida.org/mailman/listinfo/vocal