Michael G Schwern wrote:
> The idea that a class is either 'perfect' or 'complete' has to be the
> silliest, most arrogant thing I've ever heard!
So, subsequent refinements have to use a "has-a"
instead of an "is-a" relation in re: objects of the "final" class.
Maybe the inclusion of this feature could lets certain nervous
implementors get to sleep without worrying about getting blamed
for things their objects did after they were out of their control.
Java is, after all, all about giving guarantees of authenticity
and whatnot.
Bill J. Programmer publishes a class foo that is guaranteed to correctly
blarg the frobniz, someone subclasses it and breaks the blarg function,
that simply will not do!
With a "final" it is no longer possible for the new class to identify
itself as a foo.
--
David Nicol 816.235.1187
A government of the p8a, by the p8a, and for the p8a.
