protected

Cannot access protected member in base class [duplicate]

♀尐吖头ヾ 提交于 2019-11-27 21:52:56
问题 This question already has an answer here: What's the real reason for preventing protected member access through a base/sibling class? 6 answers Consider you have the following code: public abstract class MenuItem { protected string m_Title; protected int m_Level; protected MenuItem m_ParentItem; public event ChooseEventHandler m_Click; protected MenuItem(string i_Title, int i_Level, MenuItem i_ParentItem) { m_Title = i_Title; m_Level = i_Level; m_ParentItem = i_ParentItem; } } and public

Protected fields not visible to subclasses

南楼画角 提交于 2019-11-27 21:21:24
I'm writing a custom view that directly extends android.view.View . If I try to access fields mScrollX or mScrollY , I see an error that the field "cannot be resolved or is not a field." The source code for android.view.View has mScrollX, mScrollY, and similar variables declared protected . How is it that my direct subclass cannot access protected fields of its parent class? (Classes like ScrollView apparently can.) P.S. I realize that I can call getScrollX() , but I want to update these fields; calling setScroll() has side effects that I don't want. It's because they are not part of the

protected vs public constructor for abstract class? Is there a difference?

廉价感情. 提交于 2019-11-27 20:39:12
问题 This question is out of curiosity. Is there a difference between: public abstract class MyClass { public MyClass() { } } and public abstract class MyClass { protected MyClass() { } } Thanks. 回答1: They are the same for all practical purposes. But since you asked for differences, one difference I can think of is if you are searching for the class's constructor using reflection, then the BindingFlags that match will be different. BindingFlags flags = BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.Instance;

Access to protected member through member-pointer: is it a hack?

試著忘記壹切 提交于 2019-11-27 17:41:23
We all know members specified protected from a base class can only be accessed from a derived class own instance. This is a feature from the Standard, and this has been discussed on Stack Overflow multiple times: Cannot access protected member of another instance from derived type's scope ; Why can't my object access protected members of another object defined in common base class? And others. But it seems possible to walk around this restriction with member pointers, as user chtz has shown me : struct Base { protected: int value; }; struct Derived : Base { void f(Base const& other) { //int n

Call protected method from a subclass of another instance of different packages

白昼怎懂夜的黑 提交于 2019-11-27 16:55:12
问题 I want to invoke a protected method of another instance from within a subclass of the class providing this protected method. See the following example: public class Nano { protected void computeSize() { } } public class NanoContainer extends Nano { protected ArrayList<Nano> children; } public class SomeOtherNode extends NanoContainer { // {Nano} Overrides protected void computeSize() { for (Nano child: children) { child.computeSize(); // << computeSize() has protected access in nanolay.Nano }

Properties for Class and Its Subclasses Only

拟墨画扇 提交于 2019-11-27 15:55:54
问题 Is it possible to define properties that are only available to the class they are defined in, and that class's subclasses? Stated another way, is there a way to define protected properties? 回答1: Technically, no. Properties are really just methods, and all methods are public. The way we "protect" methods in Objective-C is by not letting other people know about them. Practically, yes. You can define the properties in a class extension, and still @synthesize them in your main implementation

How to open a password protected excel file using python?

末鹿安然 提交于 2019-11-27 15:49:45
I looked at the previous threads regarding this topic, but they have not helped solve the problem. how to read password protected excel in python How to open write reserved excel file in python with win32com? I'm trying to open a password protected file in excel without any user interaction. I searched online, and found this code which uses win32com.client When I run this, I still get the prompt to enter the password... from xlrd import * import win32com.client import csv import sys xlApp = win32com.client.Dispatch("Excel.Application") print "Excel library version:", xlApp.Version filename

Protected data in parent class not available in child class?

匆匆过客 提交于 2019-11-27 15:06:27
I am confused: I thought protected data was read/writable by the children of a given class in C++. The below snippet fails to compile in MS Compiler class A { protected: int data; }; class B : public A { public: B(A &a) { data = a.data; } }; int main() { A a; B b = a; return 0; } Error Message: Microsoft (R) 32-bit C/C++ Optimizing Compiler Version 15.00.30729.01 for 80x86 Copyright (C) Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. demoFail.cpp demoFail.cpp(12) : error C2248: 'A::data' : cannot access protected member declared in class 'A' demoFail.cpp(4) : see declaration of 'A::data' demoFail

Access to method pointer to protected method?

十年热恋 提交于 2019-11-27 15:04:06
This code: class B { protected: void Foo(){} } class D : public B { public: void Baz() { Foo(); } void Bar() { printf("%x\n", &B::Foo); } } gives this error: t.cpp: In member function 'void D::Bar()': Line 3: error: 'void B::Foo()' is protected Why can I call a protected method but not take its address? Is there a way to mark something fully accessible from derived classes rather than only accessible from derived classes and in relation to said derived class? BTW: This looks related but what I'm looking for a reference to where this is called out in the spec or the like (and hopefully that

What is the practical use of protected inheritance?

寵の児 提交于 2019-11-27 14:49:26
问题 Public inheritance is easy. A : public B means every A is a B. In most programming language, like vb.net and objective-c, this is the only type of inheritance. Private inheritance is also easy but pointless A : private B means A is implemented by B. However, that's pointless because that means A should contain B instead. Ownership means less coupling with no disadvantage. Then we have protected inheritance. Can anyone explain to me what the hell is that for? Some says it's an "as a