From -1568773052835960886 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: f78e5,c9300cc6a0b28243 X-Google-Attributes: gidf78e5,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-08-06 21:52:49 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsfeed.icl.net!newsfeed.fjserv.net!kibo.news.demon.net!mutlu.news.demon.net!demon!mail2news.demon.co.uk!devnull From: sebmol@yahoo.com ("Sebastian Moleski") Newsgroups: comp.std.c++ Subject: Re: no_base_call Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2003 04:52:46 +0000 (UTC) Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Lines: 25 Approved: fjh@cs.mu.oz.au (Fergus Henderson , moderator of comp.std.c++) Message-ID: References: <_azXa.385380$jp.11007710@twister.southeast.rr.com> X-Trace: mail2news.demon.co.uk 1060231966 19134 10.0.0.1 (7 Aug 2003 04:52:46 GMT) X-Complaints-To: abuse@demon.net NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2003 04:52:46 +0000 (UTC) X-Received: from mulga.cs.mu.oz.au ([128.250.1.22]) by news.demon.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 19kclX-0004yT-00 for mail2news@news.news.demon.net; Thu, 07 Aug 2003 04:52:45 +0000 X-Received: by mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU id OAA29116; Thu, 7 Aug 2003 14:52:37 +1000 (EST) X-Authentication-Warning: mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU: fjh set sender to devnull@stump.algebra.com using -f X-Path: comp-std-cpp-robomod!not-for-mail X-Robomod: STUMP, ichudov@algebra.com (Igor Chudov) X-Delivered-To: std-c++@ucar.edu X-Newsgroups: comp.std.c++ X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_01,FORGED_YAHOO_RCVD,PRIORITY_NO_NAME, QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,REFERENCES version=2.55 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.55 (1.174.2.19-2003-05-19-exp) Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.std.c++:20507 "Andy Sawyer" wrote in message news:u18uwee9.fsf@evo6.com... > > Um, if the virtual function is private in the base class, the derived > > class can't call the base class implementation either. No need to > > resort to run-time kludges. > > Sure, but the OP seemd to object to the private virtual function > approach. And, presumably, the private virtual function would be > accessible indirectly via a call to some public or protected function? > (A virtual function which cannot be called *at all* seems a little > pointless to me) You basically get the template method pattern through private virtual functions. So, yes, of course those private virtual functions can be called through the public or protected class interface but not directly. sm --- [ comp.std.c++ is moderated. To submit articles, try just posting with ] [ your news-reader. If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu ] [ --- Please see the FAQ before posting. --- ] [ FAQ: http://www.jamesd.demon.co.uk/csc/faq.html ]