Typically, Objective-C class are abstract by convention only—if the author documents a class as abstract, just don't use it without subclassing it. There is no compile-time enforcement that prevents instantiation of an abstract class, however. In fact, there is nothing to stop a user from providing implementations of abstract methods via a category (i.e. at runtime). You can force a user to at least override certain methods by raising an exception in those methods implementation in your abstract class:

[NSException raise:NSInternalInconsistencyException 
            format:@"You must override %@ in a subclass", NSStringFromSelector(_cmd)];

如果您的方法返回一个值，那么使用起来会更容易一些

@throw [NSException exceptionWithName:NSInternalInconsistencyException
                               reason:[NSString stringWithFormat:@"You must override %@ in a subclass", NSStringFromSelector(_cmd)]
                             userInfo:nil];

这样就不需要从方法中添加return语句了。

如果抽象类实际上是一个接口(即没有具体的方法实现)，使用Objective-C协议是更合适的选择。

创建抽象类的简单示例

// Declare a protocol
@protocol AbcProtocol <NSObject>

-(void)fnOne;
-(void)fnTwo;

@optional

-(void)fnThree;

@end

// Abstract class
@interface AbstractAbc : NSObject<AbcProtocol>

@end

@implementation AbstractAbc

-(id)init{
    self = [super init];
    if (self) {
    }
    return self;
}

-(void)fnOne{
// Code
}

-(void)fnTwo{
// Code
}

@end

// Implementation class
@interface ImpAbc : AbstractAbc

@end

@implementation ImpAbc

-(id)init{
    self = [super init];
    if (self) {
    }
    return self;
}

// You may override it    
-(void)fnOne{
// Code
}
// You may override it
-(void)fnTwo{
// Code
}

-(void)fnThree{
// Code
}

@end

在Xcode中(使用clang等)，我喜欢使用__attribute__((不可用(…)))来标记抽象类，所以如果你尝试使用它，你会得到一个错误/警告。

它提供了一些防止意外使用该方法的保护。

例子

在基类@interface标记中，"abstract"方法:

- (void)myAbstractMethod:(id)param1 __attribute__((unavailable("You should always override this")));

更进一步，我创建了一个宏:

#define UnavailableMacro(msg) __attribute__((unavailable(msg)))

这让你可以这样做:

- (void)myAbstractMethod:(id)param1 UnavailableMacro(@"You should always override this");

就像我说的，这不是真正的编译器保护，但它和你在不支持抽象方法的语言中得到的一样好。

Typically, Objective-C class are abstract by convention only—if the author documents a class as abstract, just don't use it without subclassing it. There is no compile-time enforcement that prevents instantiation of an abstract class, however. In fact, there is nothing to stop a user from providing implementations of abstract methods via a category (i.e. at runtime). You can force a user to at least override certain methods by raising an exception in those methods implementation in your abstract class:

[NSException raise:NSInternalInconsistencyException 
            format:@"You must override %@ in a subclass", NSStringFromSelector(_cmd)];

如果您的方法返回一个值，那么使用起来会更容易一些

@throw [NSException exceptionWithName:NSInternalInconsistencyException
                               reason:[NSString stringWithFormat:@"You must override %@ in a subclass", NSStringFromSelector(_cmd)]
                             userInfo:nil];

这样就不需要从方法中添加return语句了。

如果抽象类实际上是一个接口(即没有具体的方法实现)，使用Objective-C协议是更合适的选择。

从Omni组邮件列表:

Objective-C没有像Java那样的抽象编译器结构 这一次。

因此，您所要做的就是将抽象类定义为任何其他正常类 并为抽象方法实现方法存根 空或报告不支持选择器。例如……

- (id)someMethod:(SomeObject*)blah
{
     [self doesNotRecognizeSelector:_cmd];
     return nil;
}

我还执行以下操作来防止抽象的初始化 通过默认初始化式初始化。

- (id)init
{
     [self doesNotRecognizeSelector:_cmd];
     [self release];
     return nil;
}

你不能创建一个委托吗?

委托就像一个抽象基类，你说需要定义什么函数，但实际上你不定义它们。

然后，每当你实现委托(即抽象类)时，编译器就会警告你需要为哪些可选函数和强制函数定义行为。

对我来说，这听起来像一个抽象基类。