I was explaining OOP to my friend. I was unable to answer this question. (How shameful of me? :( )
I just escaped by saying, since OOP depicts the real world. In rea
Exactly because aChild is a superset of aParent's abilities. You can write:
class Fox : Animal
Because each Fox is an Animal. But the other way is not always true (not every Animal is a Fox).
Also it seems that you have your OOP mixed up. This is not a Parent-Child relationship, because there's no composition/trees involved. This is a Ancestor/Descendant inheritance relation.
Inheritance is "type of" not "contains". Hence it's Fox is a type of Animal, in your case it doesn't sound right -- "Child is a type of Parent" ? The naming of classes was the source of confusion ;).
class Animal {}
class Fox : Animal {}
class Fish : Animal {}
Animal a = new Fox(); // ok!
Animal b = new Fish(); // ok!
Fox f = b; // obviously no!