Topic: Nit of the day.


Author: rfg@lupine.ncd.com (Ron Guilmette)
Date: 14 Dec 90 02:33:21 GMT
Raw View
I'm at it again.  Picking nits as usual.

Given:

 struct S {
  int i;
 };

 void S (void);

 void foobar ()
 {
  S ();
 }

Did I call the explicitly declared function `S' or did I call the
implicitly compiler-created constructor for `struct S'?

References to E&S would be appreciated.




Author: lijewski@batcomputer.tn.cornell.edu (Mike Lijewski)
Date: 16 Dec 90 20:04:41 GMT
Raw View
In article <3000@lupine.NCD.COM> rfg@lupine.ncd.com (Ron Guilmette) writes:
>I'm at it again.  Picking nits as usual.
>
>Given:
>
> struct S {
>  int i;
> };
>
> void S (void);
>
> void foobar ()
> {
>  S ();
> }
>
>Did I call the explicitly declared function `S' or did I call the
>implicitly compiler-created constructor for `struct S'?

Good question.  On page 27 of E&S is an example very similar to yours.
The answer in that case is the function `S' would be called.  If we
then turn to page 167  there is an example of a class X with an explicit
constructor w/ prototype X(int);.  If we also have a function void X(int);
the statement X(1); becomes ambiguous.  Seems to me we need a much better
explanation of when an implicitely-defined default constructor is
generated and, a bit more explicitely, can I call such a constructor
in a program.  I would also like to know why a default
constructor is generated for EVERY class which has no explicitely-
declared constructors (page 264 E&S).  Seems to me this contradicts the
example on page 27.

--
Mike Lijewski  (H)607/272-0238 (W)607/254-8686
Cornell National Supercomputer Facility
ARPA: lijewski@theory.tn.cornell.edu  BITNET: mjlx@cornellf.bitnet
SMAIL:  25 Renwick Heights Road, Ithaca, NY  14850