[haXe] Abstract Classes?

[Michael Pliskin]

Hello Daniel & Nicolas & all,

  I was reading this thread to understand what do private fields in
  typedefs means after all, and it looks like I am too dumb for that
  :(

  Maybe someone of you could explain what is the final decision and
  behaviour in more detail?

DC> On 12/13/06, Nicolas Cannasse <ncannasse at motion-twin.com> wrote:
>> > It could be required is some pretty rare cases. For example, you can
>> > access the method using "untyped". But I guess that maybe defining
>> > "private" in typedef could be turn into a synonym of "I know what I'm
>> > doing there, let me access this private method since I'm saying so". The
>> > only problem is to have several meanings for "private" in the compiler,
>> > and that's not an easy thing to do...
>>
>> Implemented on CVS.

DC> Heh, not so difficult after all?
DC> Thanks!

DC> Dan




-- 
Best regards,
 Michael                            mailto:pl at tepkom.ru