Can a non abstract class have abstract method? If yes then why and if no then also why?

Question

0.00/5 (No votes)

See more:

Dear Friends,

I was reading an article on whether there could be non abstract methods in abstract classes or not.

Then while reading a question pops up into my mind that is vice-verse can also be true i.e., If some one is willing to make a abstract method in a non abstract class then will it be helpful or it will give a compile time error.?

This question might be novice for some but i am a little low in OOPs concepts theoretically.

Thanks

Varun

Posted 9-Apr-13 18:59pm

Varun Sareen

Add a Solution

1 solution

Add a Solution

Add your solution here

Treat my content as plain text, not as HTML

Preview 0

…

Existing Members

Sign in to your account

...or Join us

Download, Vote, Comment, Publish.

Your Email
Password
Forgot your password?

Your Email
This email is in use. Do you need your password?
Optional Password

I have read and agree to the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy
Please subscribe me to the CodeProject newsletters

When answering a question please:

Read the question carefully.
Understand that English isn't everyone's first language so be lenient of bad spelling and grammar.
If a question is poorly phrased then either ask for clarification, ignore it, or edit the question and fix the problem. Insults are not welcome.
Don't tell someone to read the manual. Chances are they have and don't get it. Provide an answer or move on to the next question.

Let's work to help developers, not make them feel stupid.

This content, along with any associated source code and files, is licensed under The Code Project Open License (CPOL)

Sergey Alexandrovich Kryukov · Accepted Answer · 2013-04-09T19:16:00

No. And you can easily check it up by writing code and trying to compile it. The indication that a class is abstract with the use of the keyword "abstract" is a sort of a fool-proof feature. It's pretty much the like the absence of non-declared variables.

You can define an abstract class with no abstract methods/properties. It is safe and may make sense, as it indicates that the class is intended to be a base class for some non-abstract classes and serve as a common interface. It does not require abstract classes and even late binding.

From the other hand, if there is at least one no abstract method/property, it requires the class to be abstract. If the class was not abstract (allowed instantiation), it would be unsafe, because then the call to the abstract method/property would be a disaster.

The keyword "abstract" applied to the class is less important than the rule explained above, as the "abstractness" could be determined only based on the members. Nevertheless, this is extra convenience and more fool-proof syntax, also more readable.

—SA