protected

I have an abstract class with a protected variable abstract class Beverage { protected string description; } I can't access it from a subclass. Intellisense doesn't show it accessible. Why is that so? class Espresso:Beverage { //this.description ?? } Short answer: description is a special type of variable called a " field ". You may wish to read up on fields on MSDN . Long answer: You must access the protected field in a constructor, method, property, etc. of the subclass. class Subclass { // These are field declarations. You can't say things like 'this.description = "foobar";' here. string

I'm trying to write an abstract class (or interface) which forces the extending class to implement a protected static function. But this is neither possible with an abstract class nor an interface. Errors: static functions should not be abstract access type for interface members must be omitted Any ideas how to accomplish that? UPDATE The purpose is basically to call the public function statically. This way the class does not need to be instanciated. It is also not necessary to make _doSpecificStuff() callable from class-external code. abstract class Foo { public static function doStuff() {

Why is it that in Java, a superclass' protected members are inaccessible by an indirect subclass in a different package? I know that a direct subclass in a different package can access the superclass' protected members. I thought any subclass can access its inherited protected members. EDIT Sorry novice mistake, subclasses can access an indirect superclasses' protected members. Perhaps you're a little confused. Here's my quick demo and shows an indirect subclass accessing a protected attribute: // A.java package a; public class A { protected int a; } // B.java package b; //<-- intermediate

@interface AClass : SomeType { @protected NSMutableArray* amINotAlreadyProtected; //? } Why does this code need @protected if @protected is the default? This code was written by a very experienced programmer, but I would omit the specifier myself. There is no need for the keyword @protected as it is the default behavior. However, some programmers tend to use it anyways incase a less experienced programmer comes along at a later date and doesn't know this. It can also be mentioned that it increase code readability incase there are some variables that are protected and other private or public.

I understand that to write python module private/protected functions you use def _func(): ... but I have an object hierarchy with specialized overrides. Also I want to hide the internal implementation(since its not meant for outside use, and so I can hopefully improve it without breaking code, not that I think anybody will use it except me). If I use class Paragraph(Tag): def _method(self): ... and try calling _method from a different class that subclasses Tag IntelliJ IDEA(and probably pylint/other checkers would also) give me a warning. Is there any way to fix this? My use case is a set of

I have the following classes: class Base { protected: int myint; }; class Derived : public Base { public: bool operator==(Base &obj) { if(myint == obj.myint) return true; else return false; } }; But when I compile it, it gives the following errors: int Base::myint is protected within this context I thought that protected variables are accessible from the derived class under a public inheritance. What is causing this error? Derived can access protected members of Base on all instances of Derived only. But obj isn't an instance of Derived , it's an instance of Base - so access is forbidden. The

A Java library class I'm using declares protected getPage(): Page { ... } Now I want to make a helper Scala mixin to add features that I often use. I don't want to extend the class, because the Java class has different subclasses I want to extend at different places. The problem is that if I use getPage() in my mixin trait , I get this error: Implementation restriction: trait MyMixin accesses protected method getPage inside a concrete trait method. Is there a solution how to make it work, without affecting my subclasses? And why is there this restriction? So far, I came up with a work-around:

Besides the normal explenation of being visible or not to derived classes, is their any other difference? If you make it more visible, is it taking more or less memory, does it slow thing down or...? Nawaz Apart from the accessibility of members outside or to the derived classes, access specifiers might affect the object layout. Quoting from my other answer : Usually, memory address for data members increases in the order they're defined in the class . But this order may be disrupted at any place where the access-specifiers ( private , protected , public ) are encountered . This has been