Re: How to stop inheritance in a good way?

["Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com>]

"reinert" <reinkor@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:755521b8-d0a8-41bd-b547-da1136e3b8e1@googlegroups.com...
...
> and I want object2_2_t *not* to inherit the function B (from type 
> object1_t).
> I can make a dummy function B for object2_2_t (to override), but is it a 
> more
>elegant/proper way? Or I here somehow break the concept of inheritance and
>enter a "dead end" ?

If you're only trying to inherit interfaces, then Dmitry's approach would 
work. If you are trying to inherit implementations as well (in this case, 
inheriting the implementation of function A for Object1_Type so you doesn't 
have to write A again for Object2_Type), then there really isn't a solution 
short of overriding with the B that raises an exception.

The reason that it has to be this way is that one can declare 
objects/parameters of type Object1_Type'Class, and a dispatching call on B 
is possible for such a type, and that call better have some body to execute. 
OOP dogma (LSP) would generally consider that broken abstraction. (I'd say 
that sometimes you have to do that to get the job done reasonably.)

                                          Randy.