Re: privatising public member functions in derived classes.
On Nov 21, 5:12 am, "Victor Bazarov" <v.Abaza...@comAcast.net> wrote:
Now, the "duck typing" doesn't work, does it? LSP or not, what is
the point of hiding 'foo' in 'B'? If you didn't intend to call the
'foo' member directly, you ought to make it private and keep it
private:
struct A {
private:
virtual void foo() { cout << "aaa\n"; }
public:
void doFoo() { foo(); }
};
struct B : A {
private:
virtual void foo() { cout << "bbb\n"; }
};
To me this also seems a little pointless. If I want to convey
to clientA that he may only call foo (or doFoo, for that
matter), nothing stops client B from calling doFoo().
What you are showing here above allows doFoo to dictate
the order of the calling (template method) if there is
an order, but it does not help with indicating which
client is supposed to use the applicable interface.
This however does:
class A
{
friend class ClientOfA;
virtual void foo() = 0;
//...
};
or...
class A
{
friend class ClientOfA;
void doFoo(){ /*..call foo etc...*/ }
virtual void foo() = 0;
};
class B{}; //All above private.