f the compiler required him to call super(), he would have had more
information to figure out what was wrong
no. there is nothing more in that as all classes extend at least object. anyway this is pedantic. helmut: i advise you to download thinking in java by bruce eckels and read about OO, its free and will explain OO concepts very well. On 8/29/06, Steven Sacks | BLITZ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
You are being far too defensive. I was not attacking you, I was attacking lazy coding practices. I didn't say YOU are a lazy coder, I said taking advantage of a compiler's shortcoming is lazy coding. If the compiler required him to call super(), he would have had more information to figure out what was wrong. My telling him to call super() provides information to the relationship of inherited classes. You saying that the compiler allows you to get away without calling super() doesn't help him understand his problem nor is it good practice, especially for somebody who is learning the ropes of OOP. _______________________________________________ Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com
-- j:pn http://www.lennel.org _______________________________________________ Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com
