pkturner@cup.portal.com (Prescott K Turner) (12/27/89)
In article <25955350.5608@paris.ics.uci.edu> rfg@ics.uci.edu (Ron Guilmette) wr ites: > In the new C++ Reference Manual, it is stated that: > > "An abstract class is a class that can only be used as a base class > of some other class; no objects of an abstract class may be created > EXCEPT AS SUB-OBJECTS OF SOME OTHER CLASS". > ... > Can sombody please tell me how (or why) it makes any sense > to allow this exception to the (otherwise reasonable) rule? The latter part of the rule was not intended to modify the former part, just to explain its consequences. Where it says sub-objects it's only referring to sub-objects which arise from a base class relationship, not member objects. Presumably when X3J16 gets finished with this, the second part will begin "Note:" -- Prescott K. Turner, Jr. Language Processors, Inc. 959 Concord St., Framingham, MA 01701 USA (508) 626-0006 x232 UUCP: ...sun!cup.portal.com!pkturner Internet: pkturner@cup.portal.com