home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: cs.mu.OZ.AU!bounce-back
- From: Roman Lechtchinsky <wolfro@cs.tu-berlin.de>
- Newsgroups: comp.std.c++
- Subject: "explicit" default constructor?
- Date: 27 Mar 96 03:07:56 GMT
- Organization: Technical University of Berlin
- Approved: fjh@cs.mu.oz.au
- Message-ID: <31588662.F1@cs.tu-berlin.de>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: munta.cs.mu.oz.au
- X-Original-Date: Wed, 27 Mar 1996 01:05:54 +0100
- X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0 (Win95; I)
- X-Auth: PGPMoose V1.1 PGP comp.std.c++
- iQBFAgUBMVixGeEDnX0m9pzZAQGX3QGAiUuW51E8tGPh8s9ohXeuQubt4nAw8h+Z
- LZzFmZRpT+MQfg9XqrsFZtWKCPxyQfpa
- =9FbA
- Originator: fjh@munta.cs.mu.OZ.AU
-
- Hi,
-
- as I read the section [class.conv.ctor] of the DWP, I get the impression that
- the description of converting and non-converting constructors applies to all
- constructors, i.e. a constructor is either converting or non-converting. A
- non-converting constructor creates an object "only where a constructor call
- is explicitly indicated by the syntax". This has no implications on
- constructors with more than one parameter, but what about the default
- constructor? Should a default constructor call be really indicated by the
- syntax and if so, how is it to be done? What if the default constructor is
- declared "explicit"?
-
- Bye
-
- Roman
- ---
- [ comp.std.c++ is moderated. To submit articles: try just posting with ]
- [ your news-reader. If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu ]
- [ FAQ: http://reality.sgi.com/employees/austern_mti/std-c++/faq.html ]
- [ Policy: http://reality.sgi.com/employees/austern_mti/std-c++/policy.html ]
- [ Comments? mailto:std-c++-request@ncar.ucar.edu ]
-