[GR-Jug] inheritance ?

[Matthew Carpenter]

Carlus Henry wrote:

>You are a member of the Grand Rapids Java Users Group mailing list.  
>Please see the bottom of this message for information on unsubscription/customizing your preferences.
>Are we still planning on meeting tomorrow at Perkins on Alpine?  What time?
>
>Carlus
>
>  
>
>>>>matt at eisgr.com 02/02/04 02:53PM >>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>You are a member of the Grand Rapids Java Users Group mailing list.  
>Please see the bottom of this message for information on unsubscription/customizing your preferences.
>Derek Vredevoogd wrote:
>
>  
>
>>You are a member of the Grand Rapids Java Users Group mailing list.  
>>Please see the bottom of this message for information on unsubscription/customizing your preferences.
>>Hey thanks.
>>I don't know if I quite understand you're logic here.
>>But, I do have an idea what you are saying.
>>I can ask again at the next meeting.
>>
>>I was dealing a bit with polymorphism.  
>>I was hoping to put a private method in my 
>>subclass and have it still be available in 
>>its parent class(without declaring it in the parent) after conversion.  But 
>>somehow I don't think that will work.
>>But, then I got real confused and this 
>>question came to mind.
>>Anyways, no worries. Not a big deal right now.
>>
>>------
>>
>>OK, here is a stumper, at least for me.
>>
>>Do the modifiers assigned to features in a parent class 
>>dictate what features will be inherited by its children?
>>If so, what are the rules, and where is a good document about it?
>>
>>Modifiers:
>>public,default,protected,default
>>final,abstract,static,native,transient,
>>synchronized,volatile
>>
>>features:
>>class, method, or variable
>>
>> 
>>
>>    
>>
>There is not way to inherit up the inheritance tree.  Inheritance only 
>flows "down" from parent to child.  If you are a hack, you can cast the 
>parent object as its child in order to take advantage of the child's 
>methods, but why not just implement the method in the parent as a 
>"protected"?  If it doesn't work for all children, reimplement over it, 
>or re-subclass (adopt) it under a different parent.
>
>Make sense?  To reiterate Carlus's question, what exactly are you trying 
>to do?  Why would it make sense to NOT implement in the parent and yet 
>use it there?
>
>_______________________________________________
>Jug mailing list
>Jug at gr-jug.org 
>Un/Subscribe/Customize http://gr-jug.org/mailman/listinfo/jug
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Jug mailing list
>Jug at gr-jug.org
>Un/Subscribe/Customize http://gr-jug.org/mailman/listinfo/jug
>
>
>  
>
I'll be there at 7am.