By: jackson

jackson — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 17:07:32 +0000

Thanks for the alternative. I wrapped it in the code formatting:



// code…

Your version would seem to work, but looks much more expensive. You have to call getQualifiedClassName(), split a string (which allocates a new array too), a dynamic array access, and a string compare. The version I wrote about just does an Object (pointer) compare. Could you explain why you prefer the version you posted? I’d be interested to hear if it has some benefits over the version I wrote about.

Thanks for commenting!

By: Hernan

Hernan — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 17:01:24 +0000

I do that a lot, but I use this:

public function MyClass()
{
    // THIS REPLACES ABSTRACT CLASSES
    if (getQualifiedClassName(this).split('::')[1] == 'MyClass')
    {
        throw new Error ('WARNING: MyClass should be treated as an abstract class.');
    }
}

Comments on: Abstract Classes

By: jackson

By: Hernan