Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #26188

Re: Why “new”?

Date	2011-02-07 19:15 -0500
From	Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.java.programmer
Subject	Re: Why “new”?
References	(2 earlier) <iii8s4$4tt$1@lust.ihug.co.nz> <iii9dq$3pr$1@news.eternal-september.org> <iiiaia$5t9$1@lust.ihug.co.nz> <iiicja$epf$1@news.eternal-september.org> <iiihfu$9pf$1@lust.ihug.co.nz>
Message-ID	<4d508b0a$0$23762$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> (permalink)
Organization	SunSITE.dk - Supporting Open source

Show all headers | View raw

On 04-02-2011 22:51, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> In message<iiicja$epf$1@news.eternal-september.org>, Mike Schilling wrote:
>
>> "Lawrence D'Oliveiro"<ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand>  wrote in message
>> news:iiiaia$5t9$1@lust.ihug.co.nz...
>>
>>> In message<iii9dq$3pr$1@news.eternal-september.org>, Mike Schilling
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Lawrence D'Oliveiro"<ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand>  wrote in
>>>> message news:iii8s4$4tt$1@lust.ihug.co.nz...
>>>>>
>>>>> You already have that confusion, when every method declaration in Java
>>>>> is effectively virtual, unlike C++.
>>>>
>>>> That's not true, you know.
>>>
>>> No, I don’t know. Please explain.
>>
>> Private methods are not virtual, nor are static methods.
>
> Private methods can still be virtual—see pages 189-190 of the C++ spec for
> an example. And I can’t see any prohibition in section 10.3 (“Virtual
> functions”) against them being static.
>
> Like I said, in Java, effectively all methods are virtual.

No.

And I can't understand why you think the C++ spec applies
to Java.

Especially since the Java spec explicit says otherwise.

Arne

Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Why “new”? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-02-05 13:53 +1300
  Re: Why “new”? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-07 19:01 -0500
    Re: Why “new”? Ken Wesson <kwesson@gmail.com> - 2011-02-08 19:51 +0100
    Re: Why “new”? Ken Wesson <kwesson@gmail.com> - 2011-02-08 12:33 +0100
      Re: Why “new”? Peter Duniho <NpOeStPeAdM@NnOwSlPiAnMk.com> - 2011-02-08 20:32 +0800
  Re: Why “new”? Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-02-05 09:07 -0500
  Re: Why “new”? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-02-05 16:51 +1300
    Re: Why “new”? Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-02-04 23:06 -0500
    Re: Why “new”? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-02-05 19:45 +1300
      Re: Why “new”? Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-02-05 10:32 -0500
    Re: Why “new”? Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-02-04 23:40 -0500
    Re: Why “new”? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-07 19:15 -0500
  Re: Why “new”? blmblm@myrealbox.com <blmblm@myrealbox.com> - 2011-02-09 15:31 +0000
  Re: Why ?new?? Owen Jacobson <angrybaldguy@gmail.com> - 2011-02-05 10:46 -0500
  Re: Why “new”? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-02-05 19:29 +1300
    Re: Why “new”? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-07 19:10 -0500
    Re: Why “new”? Ken Wesson <kwesson@gmail.com> - 2011-02-07 04:45 +0100
      Re: Why “new”? Ken Wesson <kwesson@gmail.com> - 2011-02-08 12:17 +0100
        Re: Why “new”? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-08 23:05 -0500
        Re: Why “new”? Ken Wesson <kwesson@gmail.com> - 2011-02-08 19:49 +0100
        Re: Why “new”? Peter Duniho <NpOeStPeAdM@NnOwSlPiAnMk.com> - 2011-02-08 20:24 +0800
      Re: Why “new”? Ken Wesson <kwesson@gmail.com> - 2011-02-07 09:18 +0100
        Re: Why “new”? Peter Duniho <NpOeStPeAdM@NnOwSlPiAnMk.com> - 2011-02-07 16:38 +0800
      Re: Why “new”? Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-02-06 20:20 -0800
    Re: Why “new”? Peter Duniho <NpOeStPeAdM@NnOwSlPiAnMk.com> - 2011-02-07 11:27 +0800
    Re: Why “new”? Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-02-05 09:22 -0500
    Re: Why “new”? Ken Wesson <kwesson@gmail.com> - 2011-02-07 04:17 +0100
    Re: Why “new”? Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-02-05 10:41 -0500
  Re: Why “new”? Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-02-05 10:38 -0500
  Re: Why “new”? Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-02-04 23:43 -0500
    Re: Why “new”? Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-02-05 09:31 -0400
  Re: Why “new”? Daniele Futtorovic <da.futt.news@laposte.net.invalid> - 2011-02-05 18:43 +0100
  Re: Why “new”? Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-02-04 20:05 -0500
    Re: Why “new”? "Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> - 2011-02-04 17:33 -0800
      Re: Why “new”? Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-02-05 09:13 -0500
      Re: Why “new”? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-02-05 14:53 +1300
        Re: Why “new”? Kevin McMurtrie <mcmurtrie@pixelmemory.us> - 2011-02-04 21:31 -0800
          Re: Why “new”? Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-02-05 01:25 -0500
    Re: Why “new”? Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@geek-central.gen.new_zealand> - 2011-02-05 14:24 +1300
  Re: Why “new”? Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2011-02-04 23:47 -0500
  Re: Why “new”? Daniele Futtorovic <da.futt.news@laposte.net.invalid> - 2011-02-05 02:09 +0100

csiph-web