On Jul 13, 2015, at 7:15 PM, Quincey Morris <quinceymor...@rivergatesoftware.com> wrote: > > On Jul 13, 2015, at 16:55 , Charles Srstka <cocoa...@charlessoft.com > <mailto:cocoa...@charlessoft.com>> wrote: >> >> What’s the intended use of that, to force an instance to use a superclass’s >> implementation of some method instead of the overridden version? If so, that >> seems really open to abuse… > > I dunno, personally. But it was discussed in the old Swift forum. For example: > > https://devforums.apple.com/message/1128450#1128450 > <https://devforums.apple.com/message/1128450#1128450> > > A type-safe target-action pattern seems to be the winning use case.
Ah, that makes sense. FWIW, I decided to test it in a playground, and it does seem that it always uses the overridden version of a method, no matter which class you use to get the instance method, so objection retracted. Charles _______________________________________________ Cocoa-dev mailing list (Cocoa-dev@lists.apple.com) Please do not post admin requests or moderator comments to the list. Contact the moderators at cocoa-dev-admins(at)lists.apple.com Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/cocoa-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com
